US Pilots Labor Discussion 8/25- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[nic4us]

1 WORD "FRAGMENTATION" comimg to a theatre near you! Doug tried to sell it as a whole if AOL is correct the latter 24mos a parted out frame with no injunction, stay tuned ! MM! SUE who seperate ops? WILDER BLOG very correct, HEY DONATE AOL NEEDS MONEY!

Really?Great!Can't wait! Wilder? Not so much.Contributions up, MARTY PAID!very correct MONEY GOOD. HEY Doug says thanks. december 22, 2012! WORD up seham little know unquestionably ripe.

DOH, RONNIE VAN ZANT, "the smell of death surrounds you"

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Really?Great!Can't wait! Wilder? Not so much.Contributions up, MARTY PAID!very correct MONEY GOOD. HEY Doug says thanks. december 22, 2012! WORD up seham little know unquestionably ripe.

DOH, RONNIE VAN ZANT, "the smell of death surrounds you"
[/qu Ahh , METHANE from the WEST ! MM! I think your situation is well more like RICK DEE's say"DISCO DUCK"! MM!

 

[traderjake]

Either tries to weasel out, I sue.

"Weaseling out out of things is what separates humans from the animal kingdom, except of course, the weasel".

Homer Simpsom.

 

[traderjake]

They said it might NEVER be ripe.

CONCLUSION
[10] 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.


You and your sleazy union might be more effective if you quit making stuff up.

 

[Pi brat]

CONCLUSION
[10] 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.


You and your sleazy union might be more effective if you quit making stuff up.

Hey TJ, didn't they? They might not have said the exact words "This case may never be ripe", but they did say that it may never get to what the west claims, so it wasn't ripe. So, the fact that it may never be ripe is why they couldn't let it go forward, circumstances may change what the west case claimed. They said what the west has claimed hasn't happened yet, and may not.

I know you don't like USAPA and many of your east pilots, but do you ever stop to think that the crap you sling on here only makes it worse?

 

[Pi brat]

The company, (i.e. the party with cash in the bank to lose ) wants absolutely no part of usapa's DOH seniority theft scandal, hence their exceedingly strenuous claim of nuetrality.

Get it yet? The company does, otherwise they would not have filed the request for declaratory judgement.

Say goodbye to DOH and usapa.

Do you know that is what Doug Parker and the company want? If you don't know for sure, why don't you say it is your opinion? If that's what they want, why didn't they just do it years ago instead of letting us try to kill each other. Why now, what's in it for them?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Hey TJ, didn't they? They might not have said the exact words "This case may never be ripe", but they did say that it may never get to what the west claims, so it wasn't ripe. So, the fact that it may never be ripe is why they couldn't let it go forward, circumstances may change what the west case claimed. They said what the west has claimed hasn't happened yet, and may not.

You have to be careful to separate ripeness from merit. The 9th didn't say a DFR suit on the integrated llist might never be ripe - they said that there might be no reason to file a DFR suit. So a DFR suit on the contents of the contract will be ripe at a defined point in time - once a ratified CBA is achieved - but there may be no valid reason for filing (re-filing?) such a suit.

Jim

 

[luvn737s]

Hey TJ, didn't they? They might not have said the exact words "This case may never be ripe", but they did say that it may never get to what the west claims, so it wasn't ripe. So, the fact that it may never be ripe is why they couldn't let it go forward, circumstances may change what the west case claimed. They said what the west has claimed hasn't happened yet, and may not.

I know you don't like USAPA and many of your east pilots, but do you ever stop to think that the crap you sling on here only makes it worse?

I think what the 9th said is that there is no penalty for intent to DFR.

USAPA misinterprets the 9th's ruling. I would compare it to the 2nd amendment versus the crime of murder. While USAPA may legally have the right to bear a DOH proposal, they may not use it to commit an illegal act. How they choose to use a freedom is up to them. But if they disregard the Nicolau list, they have been put on notice, they will be held accountible.

 

[Hate2fly]

Absolutely no way.

It is my understanding that there are exactly two reasons you can get an arbitration overturned.

1. Some type of fraud,extortion, bribe or other illegal activity occured.
2. The arbitrators decision falls so far outside of common industy practices that it reflects on the arbitrators ability to have made the decision in the first place. ( contrary to Prater's bs the arbitrator could not have decided based on eye color, height and/or some other whimsical method).

The lawsuit the east MEC filled in the DC district court alleged the second had occured. Stating things like "New hires" were place with 17 year "journeymen union members". A falsehood in and of itself, and even if true, not outside of common industry practice. Further, the Nic is a weighted relative seniority integration, completely fair and equitable, and the most frequently used integration system in the industry when pilot mergers occur.

That lawsuit was a complete loser, and likely would never have gone to trial.

Hey nic4,

http://bapwild.com/blog/?p=454#comments

Mr. Wilder,

Mitch Vasin here, former AWA MEC Vice-Chairman. We have never had the pleasure of meeting.

You and I both know that your DC lawsuit was meritless. In fact, word around the RLA attorney community was that you weren’t willing to press the suit very far out of a fear of Rule 11 sanctions. In fact, the only competent legal analysis I’ve ever seen Lee Seham publish is his pre-election letter in which he states that your lawsuit had virtually zero chance of success....



Attorney Bill Wilder's response to Mitch Vasin: "You and your attorneys sought to dismiss that lawsuit by removing it to federal court, arguing that it actually constituted a DFR claim against ALPA. The federal court rejected that argument and granted our motion to remand the case to state court. (Federal courts do not remand meritless cases to state court, they dismiss them.) So in the only disputed motion on the lawsuit, the West MEC and its lawyers lost. Those are the facts about the lawsuit."

Comment by Bill_Wilder — August 19, 2009 #

About Baptiste & Wilder, P.C.
Baptiste & Wilder, P.C. counsels labor organizations representing more employees covered by the Railway Labor Act than any other law firm in the country.


You need to talk to your boy Vasin........he got spanked by B. Wilder!

Hate

 

[cleardirect]

Attorney Bill Wilder's response to Mitch Vasin: "You and your attorneys sought to dismiss that lawsuit by removing it to federal court, arguing that it actually constituted a DFR claim against ALPA. The federal court rejected that argument and granted our motion to remand the case to state court. (Federal courts do not remand meritless cases to state court, they dismiss them.) So in the only disputed motion on the lawsuit, the West MEC and its lawyers lost. Those are the facts about the lawsuit."

Comment by Bill_Wilder — August 19, 2009 #

About Baptiste & Wilder, P.C.
Baptiste & Wilder, P.C. counsels labor organizations representing more employees covered by the Railway Labor Act than any other law firm in the country.


You need to talk to your boy Vasin........he got spanked by B. Wilder!

Hate

Not sure why you think everyone gets spanked. But that is your issue.

So using your hero's own words. (Federal courts do not remand meritless cases to state court, they dismiss them.)

You will admit that usapa RICO case was meritless. The Federal court dismissed with prejudice the federal charges and dismissed the state charges without prejudice.

Dismissed not remanded. Dismissed=no merit

 

[Pi brat]

You have to be careful to separate ripeness from merit. The 9th didn't say a DFR suit on the integrated llist might never be ripe - they said that there might be no reason to file a DFR suit. So a DFR suit on the contents of the contract will be ripe at a defined point in time - once a ratified CBA is achieved - but there may be no valid reason for filing (re-filing?) such a suit.

Jim

Yeah Jim, I think you are right and I'm wrong. The terms have been thrown around so much it's hard to keep track. But, if a case has no merit, there is no way for it ripen, right? :blink:

At least I'm man enough to admit it, unlike Traderjake(and cleardirect, and Ames) when he/she was wrong. 😀

 

[Pi brat]

I think what the 9th said is that there is no penalty for intent to DFR.

USAPA misinterprets the 9th's ruling. I would compare it to the 2nd amendment versus the crime of murder. While USAPA may legally have the right to bear a DOH proposal, they may not use it to commit an illegal act. How they choose to use a freedom is up to them. But if they disregard the Nicolau list, they have been put on notice, they will be held accountible.

I think that is a good summary, as I understand it. What a lot of west guys read into the 9th is that USAPA won't just be held accountable, they will be instantly guilty when/if USAPA actions lead the west to refile a DFR.

 

[Black Swan]

There is no third method.

The newly elected representative entity now represents the same groups that entered into the arbitration.

They have what is called a Duty of Fair representation to those same groups. To forward the well documented proposal of one group to its great enrichment at the direct discriminatory expense of the second group would be considered by any jury as a failure of its DFR.

The former representative is gone, not those represented.

In essence, whether I am represented by ALPA or usapa, I still have a contract with you and the company that says we use the Nic. Either tries to weasel out, I sue.

Amazing. Do you still listen to Mitch Vasin for advice? The fact you have this poor an understanding of the issue bodes well for the East. Bill Wilder was right, and continues to be right. You ar going to get another clock cleaning shortly. Keep the donations coming. If your legal braintrust believes this, you are going to need the cash. The ripeness was the first indicator of your legal footing. This is the icing on the cake.

 

[nic4us]

Hey nic4,

http://bapwild.com/blog/?p=454#comments

Mr. Wilder,

Mitch Vasin here, former AWA MEC Vice-Chairman. We have never had the pleasure of meeting.

You and I both know that your DC lawsuit was meritless. In fact, word around the RLA attorney community was that you weren’t willing to press the suit very far out of a fear of Rule 11 sanctions. In fact, the only competent legal analysis I’ve ever seen Lee Seham publish is his pre-election letter in which he states that your lawsuit had virtually zero chance of success....



Attorney Bill Wilder's response to Mitch Vasin: "You and your attorneys sought to dismiss that lawsuit by removing it to federal court, arguing that it actually constituted a DFR claim against ALPA. The federal court rejected that argument and granted our motion to remand the case to state court. (Federal courts do not remand meritless cases to state court, they dismiss them.) So in the only disputed motion on the lawsuit, the West MEC and its lawyers lost. Those are the facts about the lawsuit."

Comment by Bill_Wilder — August 19, 2009 #

About Baptiste & Wilder, P.C.
Baptiste & Wilder, P.C. counsels labor organizations representing more employees covered by the Railway Labor Act than any other law firm in the country.


You need to talk to your boy Vasin........he got spanked by B. Wilder!

Hate

Mitch is a great guy. True pilot advocate, but he gets a lot of this stuff wrong, usually does good work on grievences though. Further, on the topic of the original east Mec lawsuit he was correct, and so am I. Virtually no chance of success of overturning the arbitrated award. All the east had was "we do not think it is fair".

Here is the totally ironic part. Lee Seham also agreed. Part of his sales pitch was that lawsuit was a loser, the east needed to vote in usapa, hire him and get themselves DFRed, and try to beat the DFR. A completely flawed strategy, but he was right, the east Mec lawsuit had no merit.

Wilder never takes into consideration in any of his arguements that there is a TA contract. Further, that the TA contract is tripartite. That is the game changer here. He argues apples, when we are dealing with an entire bowl of fruit. Sorry, Bill, your rotten apples make for a loser lawsuit.

BTW, Seham once again finds himself defending a loser lawsuit. Well, technically he is not going to lose, he is just going to be told his strategy for reneging on contracts is a loser.

 

[Black Swan]

Hey TJ, didn't they? They might not have said the exact words "This case may never be ripe", but they did say that it may never get to what the west claims, so it wasn't ripe. So, the fact that it may never be ripe is why they couldn't let it go forward, circumstances may change what the west case claimed. They said what the west has claimed hasn't happened yet, and may not.

I know you don't like USAPA and many of your east pilots, but do you ever stop to think that the crap you sling on here only makes it worse?

PI- here is the thinking you are up against. And this is why they continue to swing and miss. Simple example. Go to the police station and TRY and file an accident report for an accident. The officer is going to ask you a number of personal items. Then the officer is going to ask you when and where the accident took place. Try telling him you are filing and are suing for an accident and damage you think MIGHT happen. Look closely at him when you tell him this. You will see what these west pilots think they can do. Pretty amazing! Some would think this borders on fraud.