US Pilots Labor Discussion

[VAflyGal]

Hi guys. We wanted to thank you for finally getting all the broken planes fixed. It's nice to have things in our galleys and cabins that actually work. Thanks again for making sure everything is safe. We appreciate it.

 

[end_of_alpa]

And you still dont' understand the significance of losing on the motion to dismiss. If what you believe that law to be is true, then as a matter of law the company's suit should have clearly been dismissed. Same with Addington, and before you go off on your tangent about ripeness, a lot of you on the East just don't understand that decision either. The 9th would not have bothered with ripeness if the law was actually the way you believe, that as a matter of law it can't be a DFR for ignoring an arbitration. That would have validated everything Lee Seham has said.

But the 9th didn't do that. The 9th expects to see this again when the DFR is "painfully ripe."


Yeah. Silver seems real inclined to go your direction given her willingness to import the Addington record. Keep dreaming.

No court in this land is going to state that as a matter of law an arbitration can be ignored. Nobody. Only the delusional believe otherwise.

Keep dreaming.

Good luck and see you in court.

 

[nic4us]

So after all this banter I come back to the original question:

If every other employee at the "old companies" got to use their years of service with equal value in relation to all the other employees, why do pilots think their entitled to different treatment using the who bought who argument to erase years of service?

Because every other employee group at the "old companies" did not get to use their years of service with equal value in relation to all the other employees. Your premise is false, and you are drawing a false conclusion.

First, the non-union employees. Did the 30 year janitor at AAA become senior to Parker? He has been around a lot longer, and maybe you consider him senior to Parker, however, he did not have the position and status Parker held, hence, he does not get Parker's job. Heck, even Lakefield, who held the status and had more years, did not get Parker's job.

Now, the unionized employees. All....I say...All.. had their seniority integrated at the "new company" according to their unions integration policy, or where the groups were in seperate unions by arbitration. What you actually want, is to forego the union policy, and do a special deal just for the east pilots. The pilots, just like every other group were to be integrated using the union's integration policy. That process was completed, then after the fact, you want a special deal.

Not a single work group was integrated as you claim, based soley on their years of service.

To sum, it is the east pilots who think they are entitled to special treatment, deserve to forego what every other work group has done, and deserve to leapfrog West seniority and status, not the other way around. This all AFTER they agreed to do it within the union's policy, and that had been completed.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Keep dreaming.

Good luck and see you in court.

Why not answer the question? If the law is as you allege, then why didn't the 9th overturn and remand with instructions to dismiss with prejudice saying it could never be a DFR for a union to ignore a binding arbitration? Why didn't the company's case get dismissed? Why isn't USAPA appealing the denial of their motion to dismiss?

There's one answer to the above three questions. Let's see if you have the fortitude to admit you're dead wrong and have been dead wrong for the past four years.

 

[end_of_alpa]

No direct effect on our situation, but there is a huge indirect effect at play. TWA was the flip side of the same DFR coin. In TWA, the merger policy wasn't followed. Here, merger policy was followed, but then ignored. The result so far has been jury verdicts in both cases. The facts won't change in our case. USAPA can't undo the Bradford memo or can't hide the fact that the reason for not honoring the Nicolau is to advantage the East. If you're US Airways and you're looking at what just happened in NJ, and you're mindful of what happened in Addington, and you clearly understand the hybrid DFR claim, then I doubt anyone at the top would be risking liabilities in the billions just to negotiate with USAPA. That's the effect of yesterday's verdict on this situation.

In TWA ALPA incurred a DFR for not representing the TWA pilots properly (nut shell) . I'm still reading lees brief but from what I can tell it's very thorough.

It's not about the Bradford memo or advantage the East. I was there, I'll be called to testify and I can tell you it was to prevent ALPA from doing the same thing to us they did to the TWA pilots and strip them of their autonomous right to ratify any amendment to their CBA in 1113 hearings. Much of the pressure at TWA MEC was also felt at AAA MEC resulting in the loss of pension to PBGC and LOA 93. So much for ALPA ethics. In fact, maybe I'll get lucky enough to testify in Silvers court. I hope so, I'm looking forward to put this issue to rest once and for all.

You guys are going to lose on this and I personally look forward to the testimony.

You're implying because we are two thirds larger than you you're going to be disadvantaged with DOH and that certainly may be true but it's not illegal. Separate ratification requirements under ALPA merger policy made it even worst as far a a JCBA. The ninth understood this and Silver ismgoing tomget an education on it as well.

 

[cleardirect]

NUAGHLER CASE disagrees with your assumption! READ ON! BTW so does SEHAM! MM!

What Naughler case? That case is dead. Over a year and NOTHING has happened. Beside no FACTS have been determined in that case yet because it has not even been scheduled for trial.

The only thing the Naughler case has is opinion. Seham, really what does he disagree with that DOH is important or not important depending on who is paying him and what position they want to take. I sure hope that are sending lots of money to Naughler I am sure the bills are unpaid.

 

[Pi brat]

Obviously. They never merged. How about WA-DAL? Last I checked that was in use.

Back to being a tool, I see. I didn't ask him all of the rest, I didn't care. I took his word because it didn't really matter what happened before, it matters what happens with us! Tell me, is the Nic closer to a list that is being used or sitting on a shelf?

 

[aquagreen73s]

I was there, I'll be called to testify and I can tell you it was to prevent ALPA from doing the same thing to us they did to the TWA pilots and strip them of their autonomous right to ratify any amendment to their CBA in 1113 hearings.

First off, you're not that important to be called. It got into evidence the first time without you and it will be the same for the dec action if it's relevant to that trial, and certainly get admitted into DFR II. Otherwise, what you say is pure delusion. ALPA afforded you the exact merger policy. You mediated. You arbitrated. You got the result. You just don't like the result. The TWA pilots never alleged they were DFR'd because they didn't get an arbitration. They alleged and proved that ALPA worked against them when they should have been advocating for them.

Much of the pressure at TWA MEC was also felt at AAA MEC resulting in the loss of pension to PBGC and LOA 93. So much for ALPA ethics.

Question: were you afforded the change to mediate and arbitrate per ALPA merger policy? If so, then you're screwed. Loss of the pension has nothing to do with you somehow prevailing on a DFR in which the majority is trying to use their majority status to ignore an arbitrated result. NOTHING.

You guys are going to lose on this and I personally look forward to the testimony.

Yeah yeah yeah. We've been hearing that for four years. How's LOA93?

You're implying because we are two thirds larger than you you're going to be disadvantaged with DOH and that certainly may be true but it's not illegal.

Once again you're not understanding anything that's going on. DFR does not ask the "what," it asks "why" - why is the union doing what it's doing? Does it serve any legitimate union purpose? Your side says ignoring the arbitration does serve a legitimate union purpose because you're breaking the self-constructed log jam. How convenient. Create a problem and then offer a fix that happens to advantage every East pilot and disadvantage every West pilot. Keep thinking the law is on your side. Looking at what's going on in the economy, it's helpful to have 2/3rds of this pilot group on BK wages and work rules.

 

[Pi brat]

you are comparing that to our situation?

No, you dumbaXX, I told you honestly what he said. I wasn't trying to say that was the case here. Just that HE said there were lists that never got used, that's it. I don't know of another case like ours, do you? Is the Nicolau award currently being used at US Airways? Don't think so, so I guess it still is in dispute.

Geez, you guys can twist stuff.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Back to being a tool, I see. I didn't ask him all of the rest, I didn't care. I took his word because it didn't really matter what happened before, it matters what happens with us! Tell me, is the Nic closer to a list that is being used or sitting on a shelf?

Well you should have asked him because you also stated that the West should have heeded Prater's admonition. You repeated that admonition, to which I respond, "why?" What in the he77 is Prater talking about? He's obviously feeding you a line of BS and you accepted it as fact. There are no seniority lists "sitting on shelves." There is only one list on this property and it will be the Nicolau once there is a joint contract. The two go hand in hand. The law will not force a contract on this group outside of bankruptcy court.

 

[Pi brat]

Your side says ignoring the arbitration does serve a legitimate union purpose because you're breaking the self-constructed log jam. How convenient. Create a problem and then offer a fix that happens to advantage every East pilot and disadvantage every West pilot.

You might believe that, a judge might believe that, a jury might believe that, but it is not true. Nicolau created this log jam. Oh how I wish the ALPA JNC had not pulled out of negotiations, then you would have seen for you own eyes what kind of contract it would have taken for a contract with the Nic to pass. There is plenty of evidence now, but you guys ignore it.

 

[Piedmont1984]

Because every other employee group at the "old companies" did not get to use their years of service with equal value in relation to all the other employees. Your premise is false, and you are drawing a false conclusion.

...... The pilots, just like every other group were to be integrated using the union's integration policy. That process was completed, then after the fact, you want a special deal.

Not a single work group was integrated as you claim, based soley on their years of service.

It's one and the same.

Every other labor group used a merger policy which credited years of service because that was the fairest methodology.

You argue that DOH would be a staple job for the west and turn you into furlough fodder in PHX. If DOH had been ALPA merger policy, would you still be claiming DOH is a staple job, even though it complies with merger policy?

My guess is yes you would. Which tells me you're not so much concerned with ALPA merger policy and process as you are with your view of what is fair.

Just like us.

 

[aquagreen73s]

You might believe that, a judge might believe that, a jury might believe that, but it is not true. Nicolau created this log jam.

That last sentence is where I think a lot of East pilots fall off the wagon. Nicolau didn't create this log jam. This log jam exists because the East wants to change the result after an arbitration. Doing so affects Section 22 which impacts joint negotiations. I don't know of any policy anywhere in America that affords litigants some sort of legal recognition just because they are dissatisfied with an arbitration result.

Oh how I wish the ALPA JNC had not pulled out of negotiations, then you would have seen for you own eyes what kind of contract it would have taken for a contract with the Nic to pass. There is plenty of evidence now, but you guys ignore it.

We don't ignore it. We were the ones screaming at the East to get back to the table and make Parker pay. But the East had all the answers. They were going to take it out on the West and that's exactly what USAPA has tried to do for more than three years. The East fights the West and then wonders why the West is so resolute on defending our rights. I know you know this PI. I know you see the complete failure of the strategy to extract from the West what you should be going after the company for. Question is, how many others on the East see it or don't see it? I don't know.

 

[aquagreen73s]

It's one and the same.

Every other labor group used a merger policy which credited years of service because that was the fairest methodology.

You argue that DOH would be a staple job for the west and turn you into furlough fodder in PHX. If DOH had been ALPA merger policy, would you still be claiming DOH is a staple job, even though it complies with merger policy?

My guess is yes you would. Which tells me you're not so much concerned with ALPA merger policy and process as you are with your view of what is fair.

Just like us.

Fortunately for both groups, what each of us think is fair is completely irrelevant. What many on the East refuse to acknowledge is that what does matter is the merger policy and the only question anyone can ask in court is whether it was followed. In TWA it wasn't. DFR. Here it was, but then ignored. DFR. (Being pissed about the results of the arbitration is not a legitimate union purpose.)

 

[Pi brat]

Well you should have asked him because you also stated that the West should have heeded Prater's admonition. You repeated that admonition, to which I respond, "why?" What in the he77 is Prater talking about? He's obviously feeding you a line of BS and you accepted it as fact. There are no seniority lists "sitting on shelves." There is only one list on this property and it will be the Nicolau once there is a joint contract. The two go hand in hand. The law will not force a contract on this group outside of bankruptcy court.

Are you really an attorney? If so, I'd love to see you in court. I NEVER said you should have heeded Prater's admonition. Here's what I said:

"John Prater told me one time the there are a lot of seniority lists sitting on selves that never got used, for a variety of reasons. He tried to tell you that. Will this be one of them? I have no idea, but it hasn't been used for bidding purposes yet, has it?

Just because I said that he tried to tell you that, doesn't mean I thought you should heed his advice. I have never told west pilot's what to do, because I am not a west pilot and am not in your shoes, so I can't. I shaken my head in wonder at some of your actions, I've been pissed at a lot of your (collective) statements and actions, and I've wondered at your strategy, but I have NEVER said you should do this or that. As a matter of fact I've said I fully support your right to fight for what you believe is right....even if you are wrong. B)

It's not sitting on a shelf? Ok, maybe it's sitting on a desk, maybe it's sitting in a file, maybe Parker uses it for scratch paper, but there is one thing it is NOT used for, and that is the filling of US Airways pilot vacancies!