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

[Freebird]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It hasnt been a week yet, whats it to you, ............ up at 5;30 am to watch n post on usairways board......not much of a life for you. ehh!!

They're busy trying to think of ways to tell the East what exactly they "won", its not what most East cheerleaders think. Hmmmmm, how does Cleary spin this one? He's in a tough spot. 😱

Tread carefully, my friend...

 

[luvthe9]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It hasnt been a week yet, whats it to you, ............ up at 5;30 am to watch n post on usairways board......not much of a life for you. ehh!!

767jetz and ocarjazz are getting flight pay loss from ALPA to spend time on out board nobody would be that stupid to waste time in someone else's business if that were not the case. ALPA SUX!!!!

 

[nycbusdriver]

What color is the sky today?...I say blue but you say shades of lite blue, grey and white. To sort it out we hire a neutral 3rd party arbitrator to confirm the answer/list and we agree to final and binding to what his/her outcome/answer/list will be.

Anything sound similar?

Read the TA. Joint contract means NIC. The company and usapa must follow the ALPA negotiated TA to the letter. Enjoy loa 93 for a long time because that's the corner you easties have painted yourselves in.

I am completely ready to finish my career on LOA 93 if that's what it comes down to.

I doubt I will have to, though, because USAPA will work out a contract in the next few months, IMHO. Section 22 will be fair to east and west, but it will not be the Nicolau. The company will gladly sign it.

If that doesn't happen (and I concede it may not,) then we will see what the LOA 93 pay arbitration holds in store. If USAPA wins that one, I will LAUGH OUT LOUD so hard and long that you will all hear me in Phoenix. If that happens, YOU can enjoy your current contract for another 5 or 6 years until enough of us east pilots retire to give you enough votes for a CBA that has the Nicolau. But by then, we won't care much over here because we will be mostly gone.....which is what we have been saying all along about DOH with fences.

Time is on your side, there is no doubt. But be as ready to live under your current CBA as we are to live under LOA 93 for 5+ years.

Oh, and one more thing. If a CBA passes without the Nicolau, do you really think the USAPA gives a FF whether or not you file another lawsuit? I'm not a USAPA official in any capacity at all, but my guess is that their response would be:

BRING IT ON!

(And get your wallets ready to be drained once again while you piss into the wind.)

 

[cleardirect]

The contract is between the company and the pilots, not the company and the CBA. That's why it doesn't go away. The CBA only negotiates and signs it as an agent of the pilots.

So now you say that our contracts are between the pilot and the company. That is not what your buddies were saying during the decision/ threat of dropping usapa and becoming non union. There were all saying that if the union goes away so does the contract. So what is it? Between the pilots and the company or the union and the company. I agree with you BTW that the contract is between the pilot and the company.

Now carry that same logic to the arbitration. Take a look at the first page of the award. Look in the box that identifies who the two parties. It is between the pilots of US Airways and the pilots of AWA. So changing unions does not change the obligation. The pilots agreed to arbitration through your representatives.


Thank you for finally acknowledging the truth. Now go back and tell your leadership that you want to live up to your agreement.

 

[oscarjazz]

That's not their thinking. Their thinking, I believe, is that we live under a contract (and TAs) negotiated by the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agent). Once signed by BOTH sides, it's a done deal. In this case, we are negotiating a NEW contract. As the new CBA, USAPA gets to (or I should say is responsible for) negotiating the new one. Not part of it, ALL of it, including seniority. That's what the law says, as well.

The contract is between the company and the pilots, not the company and the CBA. That's why it doesn't go away. The CBA only negotiates and signs it as an agent of the pilots.

For clarifications, read Baptiste & Wilder's Blog on the subject. It makes it VERY clear, as well as why Judge Wake was wrong.

Here's the link:
http://bapwild.com/blog/?cat=26

Let me just say that the only aprt of this narrative that I disagree with is his criticism of SSM&P. The Judge took every opportunity to prevent them from presenting a viable case. They had been "cutoff at the knees" on numerous occasions. At least justice finally prevailed.

You are right the contract is binding on the pilots and the company. In the Transition Agreement, all three parties agreed to use ALPA Merger Policy to integrate the lists. That agreement is binding on USAPA as the new agent. The product of that policy is the Nicolau Award and that is the current system seniority list at LCC. USAPA is free to renegotiate the seniority list but under the pain of an unquestionably ripe DFR case, they must be non-discriminatory in that negotiation.

ALPA was not bound to the Nicolau award and neither is USAPA. The Nicolau award is only binding on the pilots and company insofar as that is the standard to measure a non-discriminatory seniority award. A date of hire list will not pass the smell test as non-discriminatory or at least it didn't the first time in court. If the company agrees to a discriminatory list, then they could be liable for damages for breach of contract.

By the way, ALPA sucks, I will just save you the time.

 

[ROACLT]

So now you say that our contracts are between the pilot and the company. That is not what your buddies were saying during the decision/ threat of dropping usapa and becoming non union. There were all saying that if the union goes away so does the contract. So what is it? Between the pilots and the company or the union and the company. I agree with you BTW that the contract is between the pilot and the company.

Now carry that same logic to the arbitration. Take a look at the first page of the award. Look in the box that identifies who the two parties. It is between the pilots of US Airways and the pilots of AWA. So changing unions does not change the obligation. The pilots agreed to arbitration through your representatives.


Thank you for finally acknowledging the truth. Now go back and tell your leadership that you want to live up to your agreement.

Negotiations/Arbitration between the company and union are governed by the RLA. What transpired within ALPA was simply a step in an "Internal Union Process" to arrive at a "seniority proposal". A point that was made painfully cleardirect to the Addington plaintiffs. A point the former merger counsel of the America West pilots made in another court involving litigation over the seniority issue. A point ALPA knew full well when they tried to adjust the "seniority proposal". ALPA's processes and proposals no longer have any bearing nor legal standing, as they are not the legally authorized collective bargaining agent. USAPA's legal obligation to is bargain in "Good Faith" for all and as stated before, is equivalent, and established by the US Supreme Court to act within a wide range o f reasonableness in bargain in for the collective interests of everyone. When an agent bargains for seniority in a manner that is established withing 99.9% of organized labor unions and when evidence could be presented to show past integrations within the company are also consistent with that principle, as well as how nebulous, changing and political the predecessor unions policies were, a strong case for reasonable action exists.

If the Addington attorney's were worth a salt, they would explain how weak any future case is and how much more protracted and expensive it will be, not that it will matter. Unionist principles seem to be beyond that group of plaintiffs.

 

[ROACLT]

You are right the contract is binding on the pilots and the company. In the Transition Agreement, all three parties agreed to use ALPA Merger Policy to integrate the lists. That agreement is binding on USAPA as the new agent. The product of that policy is the Nicolau Award and that is the current system seniority list at LCC. USAPA is free to renegotiate the seniority list but under the pain of an unquestionably ripe DFR case, they must be non-discriminatory in that negotiation.

ALPA was not bound to the Nicolau award and neither is USAPA. The Nicolau award is only binding on the pilots and company insofar as that is the standard to measure a non-discriminatory seniority award. A date of hire list will not pass the smell test as non-discriminatory or at least it didn't the first time in court. If the company agrees to a discriminatory list, then they could be liable for damages for breach of contract.

By the way, ALPA sucks, I will just save you the time.

Sorry OSCAR, a DOH seniority integration has never been found discriminatory in any court. Please take the time to research though.

 

[N924PS]

767jetz and ocarjazz are getting flight pay loss from ALPA to spend time on out board nobody would be that stupid to waste time in someone else's business if that were not the case. ALPA SUX!!!!

How much FPL are you, and the regular USAPA cheerleaders collecting?

Seems as if you guys must never fly. You're on here every time I lurk.........

 

[cleardirect]

I am completely ready to finish my career on LOA 93 if that's what it comes down to.

I doubt I will have to, though, because USAPA will work out a contract in the next few months, IMHO. Section 22 will be fair to east and west, but it will not be the Nicolau. The company will gladly sign it.

If that doesn't happen (and I concede it may not,) then we will see what the LOA 93 pay arbitration holds in store. If USAPA wins that one, I will LAUGH OUT LOUD so hard and long that you will all hear me in Phoenix. If that happens, YOU can enjoy your current contract for another 5 or 6 years until enough of us east pilots retire to give you enough votes for a CBA that has the Nicolau. But by then, we won't care much over here because we will be mostly gone.....which is what we have been saying all along about DOH with fences.

Time is on your side, there is no doubt. But be as ready to live under your current CBA as we are to live under LOA 93 for 5+ years.

Oh, and one more thing. If a CBA passes without the Nicolau, do you really think the USAPA gives a FF whether or not you file another lawsuit? I'm not a USAPA official in any capacity at all, but my guess is that their response would be:

BRING IT ON!

(And get your wallets ready to be drained once again while you piss into the wind.)

This post needs to be framed and placed on the wall in every crew room in the system. This so clearly defines what an east pilot is all about. He is all about me, me, me. I want mine, if I can’t get mine no one is getting anything.

So you say that you are ready to live under LOA 93, great you have been and will continue to. The LOA 93 arbitration is not going to get you anything. But look how you gloat when you think that are going to get something.


Now you think that usapa is capable of getting a contract but not so sure because you are willing to live under LOA 93.

Usapa is going to be able to create a fair section 22? Who gets to decide what is fair. East pilots get to decide what they think is fair for west pilots. How many west pilots are in the room crafting this “fair” piece of documentation? That would be none. How about we let the company draft what they think is a fair contract and we just accept whatever they put down. Would you consider that to be a fair way of doing things?

Now we come to the best part. In 5-6 years you are going to be gone. If you are that old and senior the Nicolau is not going to hurt you at all. Yet you want to prevent every pilot on the property from getting anything until you leave. Then you are going to leave this mess for the younger guys because it will not effect you. Talk about the ultimate selfish act. So those 89 hires that you all say you are protecting now will be exposed because the west will have the majority and what do you think that the majority will do?

It is quite obvious that you are not a leader, of any kind. Usapa is and should be afraid of the next law suit. They lost the first but was reversed on a technicality. But you would happily expose the union that you will leave to further litigation and damages. But you would not have to pay the bill on that. Just leave it for the junior guys to deal with. If usapa brings that same useless DOH and C&R and it passes, usapa is going down. There is no set of C&R that can make DOH between these two groups fair.

So retire under LOA93 and leave this mess to the rest of us. How selfish of you. Just because that is what is good for you. I guess on the east that is what passes for unionism.

 

[AWE Dog]

Not even the latest Leonidas update says anything about having to use the Nic. They mention doing the right thing, whatever that means. They seem to imply it but don't come out and say it. Why ?

 

[nic4us]

Sorry OSCAR, a DOH seniority integration has never been found discriminatory in any court. Please take the time to research though.

Um...you have not been paying attention for the last 2 years. usapa's DOH proposal and constitutionally mandated DOH has been found to be discriminatory in a federal court. All the 9th has said is it will not stick until it is passed in a CBA.

Pass anything other than the Nic, "unquestionably ripe" DFR. The merits of the case have not changed, you will lose again.

Before you all go there, I already know, Nicolau was senile, Wake has no understanding of the law, the jury was corrupt, etc,etc,etc,

 

[oscarjazz]

Sorry OSCAR, a DOH seniority integration has never been found discriminatory in any court. Please take the time to research though.

Well, USAPA's was before the case was dismissed as unripe. If you can find a case where an established seniority list has been changed as much as USAPA wants to change theirs, then show it to me. Please take the time to research though.

 

[ROACLT]

This post needs to be framed and placed on the wall in every crew room in the system. This so clearly defines what an east pilot is all about. He is all about me, me, me. I want mine, if I can’t get mine no one is getting anything.

So you say that you are ready to live under LOA 93, great you have been and will continue to. The LOA 93 arbitration is not going to get you anything. But look how you gloat when you think that are going to get something.


Now you think that usapa is capable of getting a contract but not so sure because you are willing to live under LOA 93.

Usapa is going to be able to create a fair section 22? Who gets to decide what is fair. East pilots get to decide what they think is fair for west pilots. How many west pilots are in the room crafting this “fair” piece of documentation? That would be none. How about we let the company draft what they think is a fair contract and we just accept whatever they put down. Would you consider that to be a fair way of doing things?

Now we come to the best part. In 5-6 years you are going to be gone. If you are that old and senior the Nicolau is not going to hurt you at all. Yet you want to prevent every pilot on the property from getting anything until you leave. Then you are going to leave this mess for the younger guys because it will not effect you. Talk about the ultimate selfish act. So those 89 hires that you all say you are protecting now will be exposed because the west will have the majority and what do you think that the majority will do?

It is quite obvious that you are not a leader, of any kind. Usapa is and should be afraid of the next law suit. They lost the first but was reversed on a technicality. But you would happily expose the union that you will leave to further litigation and damages. But you would not have to pay the bill on that. Just leave it for the junior guys to deal with. If usapa brings that same useless DOH and C&R and it passes, usapa is going down. There is no set of C&R that can make DOH between these two groups fair.

So retire under LOA93 and leave this mess to the rest of us. How selfish of you. Just because that is what is good for you. I guess on the east that is what passes for unionism.

You really don't understand much about labor law, especially as it relates to seniority. If you were to try to do something 5-6 years from now, it could not be arbitrary or capricious. You will also be dealing with a single list that has been seasoned or codified withing a collective bargaining agreement. I.e., it will not be a proposal at said time. You also neglect that as your pilots group ages and its average longevity increases, sentiments will change whether you want to admit or not. More likely than not, with the next 5 years US Airways will be merged yet again.

Sorry to inform you but the courts have long held that seniority and longevity are vested over time as part of the organized labor movement and have always been upheld as fair and whether you like the term or not, a "gold standard" within the labor movement. Maybe as a generation x'er or y'er or whatever it is now, you may perceive standing in line behind someone who has been around longer but the courts never have in any merger or labor integration.

You complain about litigation but ALPA has had as many as 6-7 DRF suits against it at one time. How much of your union dues was going for those legal fees? At least USAPA is defending and spending dues for legal fees incurred for an issue directly related to your pilot group, not an issue between ALPA and some other party. It's America and people can file lawsuits all the time and any entity with money will always be a target. No organization can ever please every subset of workers it represents and to expect USAPA to never have to defend itself is wholly unrealistic.

I believe that under the ALPA structure, 65% of dues was retained or used at the National level or in the case of US Airways about 6.5 million dollars of the 10 million in annual dues. If USAPA is spending 1 million in annual litigation, litigation mind you, directly related to your issues unlike ALPA, your group is still the net beneficiary of 5.5 million dollars annually of dues to be spent purely on your pilot groups issues.

 

[AWE Dog]

Um...you have not been paying attention for the last 2 years. usapa's DOH proposal and constitutionally mandated DOH has been found to be discriminatory in a federal court. All the 9th has said is it will not stick until it is passed in a CBA.

Pass anything other than the Nic, "unquestionably ripe" DFR. The merits of the case have not changed, you will lose again.

Before you all go there, I already know, Nicolau was senile, Wake has no understanding of the law, the jury was corrupt, etc,etc,etc,

Let me get this staight,You say USAPA's proposl was found to be discriminatory in a federal court trial that was dismissed. Does that count? I don't see anything that validates Wake's court at all. Do you?

 

[767intl]

Sorry OSCAR, a DOH seniority integration has never been found discriminatory in any court. Please take the time to research though.

OUCH! That should keep the DAL guy busy researching.

Negotiations/Arbitration between the company and union are governed by the RLA. What transpired within ALPA was simply a step in an "Internal Union Process" to arrive at a "seniority proposal". A point that was made painfully cleardirect to the Addington plaintiffs. A point the former merger counsel of the America West pilots made in another court involving litigation over the seniority issue. A point ALPA knew full well when they tried to adjust the "seniority proposal". ALPA's processes and proposals no longer have any bearing nor legal standing, as they are not the legally authorized collective bargaining agent. USAPA's legal obligation to is bargain in "Good Faith" for all and as stated before, is equivalent, and established by the US Supreme Court to act within a wide range o f reasonableness in bargain in for the collective interests of everyone. When an agent bargains for seniority in a manner that is established withing 99.9% of organized labor unions and when evidence could be presented to show past integrations within the company are also consistent with that principle, as well as how nebulous, changing and political the predecessor unions policies were, a strong case for reasonable action exists.

If the Addington attorney's were worth a salt, they would explain how weak any future case is and how much more protracted and expensive it will be, not that it will matter. Unionist principles seem to be beyond that group of plaintiffs.

Right again. It all comes down to AOL/West believing the myth that the NIC was embedded on a stone tablet and couldn't be challenged, modified or ignored, that somehow the NIC would survive ALPA's removal in tact. Freund told the court in 2007 that the NIC was nothing more than a union proposal. The problem comes down to AOL's refusal to accept the fact that the NIC was an ALPA vehicle and now ALPA is gone. They cling to the idea that in order to pass their fairness test, the NIC must be the only seniority alternative, because it was once agreed to by an organization that no longer exists on this property. The Ninth essentially advise no, the NIC doesn't have to be part of the proposal. What clearer shot across the bow could the court deliver about the fate of the NIC?

You can not UNDO final and binding arbitration, just like you can not undo the TA to your benefit or the company. But by all means, be sure and suggest this to the company to go along with your scheme because the sooner you do the sooner we'll be back in court with the company sitting by your side as a defendant.

We all know how the usapa brain trust is working feverishly on a joint contract now going on 2 + years and counting...hint to you is to read the TA and how this will procede in regards to this pilot group and the company.

I repeat...usapa, aol, alpa or the company can not take away my rights in a final and binding arbitration!

But according to the Ninth Circuit, the courts can: "Additionally, USAPA's final proposal may yet be one
that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiff's fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award...
The present impasse, in fact, could well be prolonged by prematurely resolving the West Pilots' claim
judicially at this point. Forced to bargain for the Nicolau Award, any contract USAPA could negotiate
would undoubtedly be rejected by its membership. 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 pain of an unquestionably ripe DFR suit, once a contract is ratified."

Some language needs no further explanation. The Ninth didn't have to go as far as it did. Ripeness was enough to overturn. But for whatever reason, and I'm not sure if there is precedent for what they did, they laid out a scenario in which the NIC could be totally ignored as long as the result met DFR. And as ROACLT asked, has there ever been a DOH list that lost in a DFR lawsuit?

You're also wrong on one other issue, the TA can be modified, amended, scrapped altogether by renegotiation between the CBA and the company. Not a wise move if the TA renegotiation favored one pilot group over the other, but then fairness is once again in the eye of the alleged aggrieved.

The West was faced with do we file now and lose on ripeness or do we wait and lose because the statute of limitations has passed. We filed, we won, you appealed, the 9th said not ripe, but warned you that as soon as you treat the West unfairly (i.e. pass a contract with any thing other than the Nic) it will be ripe and you face the consequences of a certainly ripe DFR.

We understand what you were faced with. It just got mangled between your lust for immediate gratification and Wake's desire to give it to you. He could have just ruled that your filing was timing, but your case was not ripe. THAT ALONE would have held a "locked and loaded" gun to USAPA's head as negotiations moved forward. But Wake wanted to make an anti-union statement. This was his perfect storm. Unfortunately, you and Wake both got washed away with the tide of the Ninth.

The 9th upheld Dr. Jacobs long pause. You cannot have it both ways, it cannot be forever not ripe and at the same time running the clock on timeliness. Bybee and Wake said ripe. Graber and Tashima said not ripe, but will be timely once you get a non-Nic contract passed. We will first exhaust our en banc and Scotus avenues with the current litigation. Then we will wait for you to get a DOH contract passed, sue, win, and not have to fear the arguement that contract breaking, reneging, weasels like Seeham and usapa would surely advance, that we were untimely.

It is now locked and loaded, either present the Nic in any tentative agreement, or get a DOH contract passed and lose the coming DFR trial.

The Ninth upheld nothing. They dismissed the case. Lack of ripeness. Sure, you can sue after there's a final CBA. To bad Wake screwed up that chance. But don't count on a "No-NIC" contract as being a DFR violation. The court gave USAPA the guidance about what a "No-NIC" must look like. nic4us, the NIC is not a stone tablet. It is a paper document that now doesn't appear to be worth the paper it was printed on. I don't think DOH with conditions/restrictions and West protections will rise anywhere close to DFR violations. But dream on. I'm sure if you fund it, you'll find a law firm that will take your case.