US Pilots Labor Discussion 6/2- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[oldiebutgoody]

Here is another point to consider...


...I agree with Jim when he said, "While the Nic wasn't on trial in the District Court, the use or rejection of Nic was - that's what got the guilty verdict against USAPA. So it would appear that any menaingful tampering with the Nic award could very well end up with the same verdict against USAPA."

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Well, I guess there's nothing wrong with agreeing with the judge whose opinions were deemed wrong.

Oh, and my educated guess is that the NIC is dead. Now USAPA can come up with a contract which is fair to ALL of its members.

And I would forget about ALPA getting back on the property anyime soon. Sorry, it's just reality.

ALPA's own lawyers, Baptiste and Wilder, called this one. They also explained why USAPA couldn't be bound to accept the NIC. Go to their website and read it if you care to.

 

[Crzipilot]

Ohhhh 320, How'd I'd love to discuss the meanings of your rantings. I'm forbid to speak my mind.


In other words. Alpa isn't coming back. Alpa isn't coming back. Management is going to have to deal with the pilot group with out the chicken little, the sky is falling, antics of pilots under alpa in previous times.

Your analysis always seems to come up and into the foray whenever leverage goes in the sway of the pilots.

Please. Stop helping management out. They have enough ammunition without pilots helping them.....

 

[end_of_alpa]

If AOL and the Addington group files an appeal with the Full 9th Circuit I believe regardless of the next legal decision this case is headed to the Supreme Court. US Airways' pilots are going to be bogged down in months-and-months and maybe years of litigation with both parties digging their heals in and the pilots will fly under LOA 93/C2004 for a long-time.

Meanwhile, other US Airways labor groups have their post merger contracts amendable, they will get their second pay raises, and the industry keeps moving ahead of US Airways' pilots in contract improvements.

There is no victory here...only losers.

Meanwhile, after reading the Ninth's Award it is all up to USAPA because they have to negotiate in good faith for both sides. The court states, "USAPA's final proposal may yet be one that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award. By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members - both East and West - in mind, under the pain of unquestionably ripe DFR suit, once a contract is ratified."

Another words, If USAPA negotiates a seniority agreement that intentionally harms the West pilots from the Nicolau Award, and it is ratified by the East pilots, the claim or case is now "ripe".

It appears to me today's ruling is clearly not a victory for USAPA and places the union in a no-win position. Another words right now there will be no Nicolau Award, but there will be no new contract without the Nicolau Award either. Thus, what will the union do so the DFR lawsuit is not "unquestionably ripe" while AOL and Addington appeals? And, all the court did was "defer judicial intervention for USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR without harming the West pilots."

Maybe, maybe USAPA and its supporters now find them self in an even worse position.

At US Airways for the pilots, whether its the Hardliners vs. Pragmatics, East vs. West, or North vs. South - how come all the pilots do is fight with one another? Nothing seems to ever get accomplished to help the pilots. According to Bill Swelbar USAPA has been a "consistent objection to every strategic initiative generated by US Airways management," which is why he he challenged speculation that United and US Airways could put together a merger. Why are US Airways' pilots so dysfunctional and the laughing stock of the industry and the AFL-CIO? Its not suprising to me that the Delta and United MEC's wanted nothing to do with US Airways' Hardline union leaders, whether it was ALPA or USAPA. Who can blame them?

Are you sick of it yet? I know I am.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

As usual, CM posts his "unbiased facts" again. You know, the guy that almost NO ONE listens to! The one who points the finger at everyone else for being a loser. The one who has no mirrors in his house.

Here is a little "tidbit" on "just the facts":

Circuit Rule 35-1. Petition for Rehearing En Banc

Where a petition for rehearing en banc is made pursuant to FRAP 35(B) in conjunction with a petition for panel rehearing, a reference to the petition for rehearing en banc, as well as to the petition for panel rehearing, shall appear on the cover of the petition. (Rev. 12/1/09)

When the opinion of a panel directly conflicts with an existing opinion by another court of appeals and substantially affects a rule of national application in which there is an overriding need for national uniformity, the existence of such conflict is an appropriate ground for petitioning for rehearing en banc. (Rev. 12/1/09)

In short, FAT CHANCE!!!

CM was, is and always shall be, "reactive", not "pro-active". The overwhelming majority of pilots, and I'm sure I can speak for most "pilots" at this company, rarely visit your website at pilotloop anymore as you can tell by the amount of "views" you get on your posts.

 

[Crzipilot]

well to make it fair to him. It's not his website, I don't think, He showed up some time after it started, but the last time I saw it.......he had ran both east and west pilots away by the constant posts he used to make, similar to the ones he used to make here back in '02 and around there.

Although from what i''ve seen, he has gotten the ear of the west, simply because he has started to "see the light" and thinks any contract should be voted in, for the sake of getting a contract (does this ring a bell from anyone?!?!?!?) the westies obviously salvating at the idea of a east pilot wanting a contract that includes the nic humored him. Then I have a feeling they too saw the light. Poor guy. Do his dogs even listen?

 

[luvthe9]

As usual, CM posts his "unbiased facts" again. You know, the guy that almost NO ONE listens to! The one who points the finger at everyone else for being a loser. The one who has no mirrors in his house.

It's quite ashame that Cleary and Parella got his job back when he was fired. But you are right no one listens to him. Get over it CM the NIC is dead!!!!!!!! get it dead, finished and over. and ALPA is not coming back. It's DOH with fences and restrictions.

 

[USA320Pilot]

End of ALPA and Luvthe9...do you always try to use a person's name and violate Board rules? By the way...don't be surprised if today's ruling does not accelerate the return of ALPA. I believe the West piltos and the majority of East Captains are tired of not getting a pay raise 5 years after the merger. This ruling could create enough momentum for a NMB Representation election. Who knows for sure, but it will be interesting watching.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[oldiebutgoody]

On another point, I disagree with Judge Bybee on one of his major points. The issue of USAPA misleading anyone into thinking that voting for them would be a guarantee that the NIC would be dispensed with is wrong. That's something else that was perpetrated by Judge Wake in the original trial. I was NEVER told that getting rid of the NIC was anything but a goal, and certainly not even a likely one. In fact, I read many times in ALPA propaganda that keeping them on the property would be the ONLY way to mitigate the NIC; in fact, Prater didn't even turn the NIC award over to the company for something like 9 months, once it became clear that ALPA was going to be defeated.

Just shows how wrong even Federal district and Circuit Court Judges can be. And another reason I would pursue misconduct charges against Judge Wake.

 

[end_of_alpa]

That is my layman's interpretation also. While the Nic wasn't on trial in the District Court, the use or rejection of Nic was - that's what got the guilty verdict against USAPA. So it would appear that any menaingful tampering with the Nic award could very well end up with the same verdict against USAPA.

Jim

Here is what the Dissent" wrote:

"The ripeness inquiry is not concerned with whether a case is as ripe as it possibly could be."

In short, either it is or it isn't.
However, the MAJORITY (We know how much you HATE the MAJORITY), stated:

We conclude that this case presents contingencies that could prevent effectuation of USAPA’s proposal and the accompanying injury.

At this point, neither the West Pilots nor USAPA can be certain what seniority proposal ultimately
will be acceptable to both USAPA and the airline as part of a final CBA.

Likewise, it is not certain whether that proposal will be ratified by the USAPA membership as part of a new,
single CBA. Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the
CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s seniority proposal — whatever USAPA’s final proposal ultimately
is.

Because these contingencies make the claim speculative, the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.

Therefore, in the dissents "attempt" to turn logic on it's head, it could well be said, using the Dissent's language, that:

"The ratification inquiry is not concerned with whether a CBA is voted in by as much of a majority as it possibly could be.

So if and when the ratification vote occurs AND if and when the MAJORITY of the ratification votes affirms a CBA with DOH with conditions and restrictions, will the real questions before the court be:

Can a DFR occur if the MAJORITY, the overwhelming MAJORITY, a MAJORITY with a number so large that it statistically proves that an overwhelming MAJORITY of the combined East and West, irregardless of geography, a MAJORITY that may even include many of the West "Plaintiffs" may of voted for, ratified a CBA???

How would you know? Testimony? Will the court's or the lawyer's subpoena ballotpoints records to see if maybe Addington, Bostic, Burman, Iranpur, Velez, or Wargocki voted FOR or AGAINST the CBA (oh thats right, at least one of them isn't even employed here)... maybe one or more of the pilots in the America West "class" voted to accept the CBA. How does THAT affect THEIR rights???

KEEP DREAMING!!!

Army of Leonidas, a minority of wanna-be union busters run by an anti-labor law firm.

 

[end_of_alpa]

End of ALPA and Luvthe9...do you always try to use a person's name and violate Board rules?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

You mean the letters CM???

They can stand for Cleary Mike, Caped Maurader, whatever!!!

Everyone on THIS board knows who I am. I don't care!

Tell us "Caped Maurader", why YOUR secret???

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

End of ALPA and Luvthe9...do you always try to use a person's name and violate Board rules? By the way...don't be surprised if today's ruling does not accelerate the return of ALPA. I believe the West piltos and the majority of East Captains are tired of not getting a pay raise 5 years after the merger. This ruling could create enough momentum for a NMB Representation election. Who knows for sure, but it will be interesting watching.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Were sure glad that's what YOU believe, just like those merger predictions, because you aint been even close to right yet.! Now that is an unbiased fact!MM!

 

[end_of_alpa]

On another point, I disagree with Judge Bybee on one of his major points. The issue of USAPA misleading anyone into thinking that voting for them would be a guarantee that the NIC would be dispensed with is wrong. That's something else that was perpetrated by Judge Wake in the original trial. I was NEVER told that getting rid of the NIC was anything but a goal, and certainly not even a likely one. In fact, I read many times in ALPA propaganda that keeping them on the property would be the ONLY way to mitigate the NIC; in fact, Prater didn't even turn the NIC award over to the company for something like 9 months, once it became clear that ALPA was going to be defeated.

Just shows how wrong even Federal district and Circuit Court Judges can be. And another reason I would pursue misconduct charges against Judge Wake.

I was there at the beginning of USAPA and I have the PICTURE to prove it. I will most likely be called to testify ( I was going to be deposed for trial but evidently the time ran out for depositions and the trial went on without me...oh well) that the foundation of USAPA was to preserve one thing and prevent one thing:

To preserve the democratic principle of "one man, one vote" and to prevent the very thing that ALPA's President did to the PHL LEC and with a high degree of probability sometime later to strip ALL the LEC's and MEC's of their power, impose trusteeship and then impose the eventual negotiation and implimentation of a CBA WITHOUT US Airways pilot imput.

Because THAT WHY USAPA WAS FORMED!!! PERIOD!!!

I can and will be called to testify on that issue. Can you AOL spies please keep this e-mail for the next trial???

It saves me a lot of time explaining our campaign position.

 

[end_of_alpa]

End of ALPA and Luvthe9...do you always try to use a person's name and violate Board rules? By the way...don't be surprised if today's ruling does not accelerate the return of ALPA. I believe the West piltos and the majority of East Captains are tired of not getting a pay raise 5 years after the merger. This ruling could create enough momentum for a NMB Representation election. Who knows for sure, but it will be interesting watching.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Man "Caped Marauder", talk about "SPIN"!!! That's you're problem YOU talk about MONEY (greed), even in the face of adversity, you run and hide in fear, even with this victory for USAPA!!! Are you smoking something, or are you always this "prophetic"??

Talk about a reach! You're joking, right Caped???

 

[oldiebutgoody]

I was there at the beginning of USAPA and I have the PICTURE to prove it. I will most likely be called to testify ( I was going to be deposed for trial but evidently the time ran out for depositions and the trial went on without me...oh well) that the foundation of USAPA was to preserve one thing and prevent one thing:

To preserve the democratic principle of "one man, one vote" and to prevent the very thing that ALPA's President did to the PHL LEC and with a high degree of probability sometime later to strip ALL the LEC's and MEC's of their power, impose trusteeship and then impose the eventual negotiation and implimentation of a CBA WITHOUT US Airways pilot imput.

Because THAT WHY USAPA WAS FORMED!!! PERIOD!!!

I can and will be called to testify on that issue. Can you AOL spies please keep this e-mail for the next trial???

It saves me a lot of time explaining our campaign position.

An amazing thing to me about the original trial was how Judge Wake accepted virtually everything put forth by the plaintiffs, while not allowing the defendants to present their case. Truly a case of "guilty until proven innocent". Every time I look at the transcripts and see how often the defendants' attorneys were admonished it amazes me. He really didn't let them present an effective case at all, not to mention the initial INCORRECT ruling about ripeness. That one ruling cost both sides in this dispute MILLIONS, not to mention the weeks of the courts' time.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Here is another point to consider...the 9th District Court ruling was NOT unanimous.

In Judge Bybee’s dissenting opinion he said, “USAPA has misled the majority about its power to improve their seniority prospects at the expense of the West Pilots. The will of the East Pilots springs from a mistaken understanding of the law and mismanaged expectations. If this is an impasse, it is one USAPA has goaded on. (Emphasis added).”

According to a colleague of mine, "Today's 9th Circuit ruling might be considered more of a win than a loss by those who might otherwise have to cut a big damages check to the West pilots. At least it means that the membership won’t be levied with an assessment THIS SUMMER for DFR related damages. However it doesn’t mean that an assessment won’t be levied against the membership to cover the cost of the attorney fees associated with defending USAPA against its own brazen stupidity. In the end, this is an opinion from the court that likely does nothing more than delay the inevitable DFR which as the court in both the majority and dissenting opinion, will be ripe at some future date if USAPA continues to pursue an 'unquestionably ripe DFR' negotiating strategy regarding seniority."

I agree with Jim when he said, "While the Nic wasn't on trial in the District Court, the use or rejection of Nic was - that's what got the guilty verdict against USAPA. So it would appear that any menaingful tampering with the Nic award could very well end up with the same verdict against USAPA."

Regards,

USA320Pilot

"Caped Marauder" does'nt read opinions very well. Bybee didn't say that, I quote in FULL:

"Instead, as the district court found, “USAPA
has misled the majority about its power to improve their
seniority prospects at the expense of the West Pilots. The will
of the East Pilots springs from a mistaken understanding of
the law and mismanaged expectations. If this is an impasse,
it is one USAPA has goaded on.” (Emphasis added).

He was simply stating what the District Court stated.

However, case is "For the foregoing reasons, we hold that Plaintiffs’
DFR claim is not ripe; therefore, the case is REMANDED to
the district court with directions that the action be DISMISSED.
No costs to either side."

Talk about COSTS!! You mean the COSTS that ALPA made us pay to REPAIR THIS MESS???

Hey, guess what, why don't some of you and your "colleagues" go back and see what I PREDICTED the ruling would be several months back....

Reversed and remanded with instructions to DISMISS, I believe it was???? How's THAT for a prediction "Caped Marauder"???

 

[cleardirect]

I find this post to be comical and so typical of the misinformed.
The MDA suit is far from dead and the deadline for filing is not June
2nd. If the author was half as smart as he pretends to be he would
have known the deadline was modified by mutual written agreement between
ALPA council and Mike Haber. The MDA pilots are receiving their 88
page memorandum of law today, June 4th. This is what was filed in
contrast to this author's post. I do not usually respond to such nonsense
but in this case I just could help myself

Um. It is 22:00 east coast time and just checked pacer. Nothing filed yet. The last filed paper in this case was 3/24/2010. There is nothing that says anything about changing the deadline. Agreement but not filed interesting way to run a case.

Would you care to post this 88 page legal document? If it is not June 2 when is it? Where is the order amending the deadline?