US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Move2CLT]

Someday when the book comes out the truth will also. But for now you can know Seham was not the first choice.

I have only second hand knowledge, but it was second hand knowledge early on. The chorus was overwhelming in support of USAPA's current position.

Like I remind folks here about 3 times a year, Seham was actually under hire by Johnny Mac when the West tried to get out of ALPA. Maybe had they been successful the two of us would have never met, thus never the ugly situation at hand. Ask the little Napoleon some time why he thought it ok to stiff Seham on his bills. What goes around comes around, karma, whatever.

Folks are quick to incorrectly say Seham has never won a case here. I no longer am represented by ALPA, nor is my new union (at least tonight) under any mandate from any court as to anything. As Charlie would say..."winning."

RR

Damn. Only an east guy would be kept working under LOA 93 and say "winning". Damn that's stupid. And considering we're the minority and don't have much say in what goes on in this union, we've done a good job keeping that fantasy you call DOH from becoming a reality.

Now that's what I call winning.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Folks are quick to incorrectly say Seham has never won a case here. I no longer am represented by ALPA, nor is my new union (at least tonight) under any mandate from any court as to anything. As Charlie would say..."winning."

RR

Frankly Reed I think the guy that does wills up the street could have mastered getting out of ALPA and since you haven't got dime one in extra pay but millions in legal fees how exactly are you defining Victory?

You could get a 25% raise and DOH and NEVER, repeat, NEVER get back what was lost during the 6 years this has taken to date.

The way it sits now there are Dutch Whores that are screwed less than you.

 

[Move2CLT]

Frankly Reed I think the guy that does wills up the street could have mastered getting out of ALPA and since you haven't got dime one in extra pay but millions in legal fees how exactly are you defining Victory?

You could get a 25% raise and DOH and NEVER, repeat, NEVER get back what was lost during the 6 years this has taken to date.

The way it sits now there are Dutch Whores that are screwed less than you.

A good post s a good post. Looks like your leaning a bit west tonight.

 

[SparrowHawk]

A good post s a good post. Looks like your leaning a bit west tonight.

Not leaning to much one way or another. Long before you started posting I've had what at best could be called reservations with Seeham and his team. I could say much of the same to the west. You've dicked around over NIC now for 6 years and you're in the same financial boat. NOTHING to show for your efforts.

 

[A320 Driver]

Frankly Reed I think the guy that does wills up the street could have mastered getting out of ALPA and since you haven't got dime one in extra pay but millions in legal fees how exactly are you defining Victory?

You could get a 25% raise and DOH and NEVER, repeat, NEVER get back what was lost during the 6 years this has taken to date.

The way it sits now there are Dutch Whores that are screwed less than you.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 😀

 

[Phoenix]

Frankly Reed I think the guy that does wills up the street could have mastered getting out of ALPA and since you haven't got dime one in extra pay but millions in legal fees how exactly are you defining Victory?

You could get a 25% raise and DOH and NEVER, repeat, NEVER get back what was lost during the 6 years this has taken to date.

The way it sits now there are Dutch Whores that are screwed less than you.

You obviously never had a job that is entirely based on seniority rather than merit or you are completely ignorant of what ALPA let Nicolau do to their union.

 

[Al Legheny]

Someday when the book comes out the truth will also. But for now you can know Seham was not the first choice.

I have only second hand knowledge, but it was second hand knowledge early on. The chorus was overwhelming in support of USAPA's current position.

Like I remind folks here about 3 times a year, Seham was actually under hire by Johnny Mac when the West tried to get out of ALPA. Maybe had they been successful the two of us would have never met, thus never the ugly situation at hand. Ask the little Napoleon some time why he thought it ok to stiff Seham on his bills. What goes around comes around, karma, whatever.

Folks are quick to incorrectly say Seham has never won a case here. I no longer am represented by ALPA, nor is my new union (at least tonight) under any mandate from any court as to anything. As Charlie would say..."winning."

RR

Here is some more about the situation we find ourselves in now. I hope they get this cleared up at this meeting.

ARTICLE IX: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST STATEMENT
C. Fiduciary Responsibility: The National Officers, BPR and committee members who serve USAPA have a clear obligation to conduct all affairs of the Association in a forthright and honest manner. Each person should make necessary decisions using good judgment and ethical and moral considerations consistent with the Code of Ethics set forth in the USAPA Constitution and Bylaws, Appendix A. All decisions of the National Officers, BBR, and committee members are to be made solely on the basis of a desire to promote the best interests of the Association and membership.


APPENDIX A
USAPA CODE OF ETHICS
I will hold the Association’s business secrets in confidence, and will take care that they are not improperly revealed.
I will do all within my powers to discharge my duties efficiently and in a manner that will not cause unnecessary delays or expense.
I will faithfully adhere to the policies, directives, and resolutions of the membership and the Board of Pilot Representatives.

1.The Associations business secrets may not be breached because of a conflicted lawyer / client relationship. This lawyer could be required to testify in a legal action against the association.

2. Unnecessary expense – did the BPR approve the contract between USAPA and this laywer? Were they made aware of it?

3. I will faithfully adhere to the policies, directives and resolutions of the BPR and membership. The BPR cannot give directives and policies if they do not know that this relationship exists and the extent to which it is now a part of Union business. A personal relationship is now part of the USAPA payroll and this is without any disclosure or debate.

This stinks to high heaven, Clean it up guys….

 

[CallawayGolf]

Here is some more about the situation we find ourselves in now. I hope they get this cleared up at this meeting.

ARTICLE IX: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST STATEMENT
C. Fiduciary Responsibility: The National Officers, BPR and committee members who serve USAPA have a clear obligation to conduct all affairs of the Association in a forthright and honest manner. Each person should make necessary decisions using good judgment and ethical and moral considerations consistent with the Code of Ethics set forth in the USAPA Constitution and Bylaws, Appendix A. All decisions of the National Officers, BBR, and committee members are to be made solely on the basis of a desire to promote the best interests of the Association and membership.


APPENDIX A
USAPA CODE OF ETHICS
I will hold the Association’s business secrets in confidence, and will take care that they are not improperly revealed.
I will do all within my powers to discharge my duties efficiently and in a manner that will not cause unnecessary delays or expense.
I will faithfully adhere to the policies, directives, and resolutions of the membership and the Board of Pilot Representatives.

1.The Associations business secrets may not be breached because of a conflicted lawyer / client relationship. This lawyer could be required to testify in a legal action against the association.

2. Unnecessary expense – did the BPR approve the contract between USAPA and this laywer? Were they made aware of it?

3. I will faithfully adhere to the policies, directives and resolutions of the BPR and membership. The BPR cannot give directives and policies if they do not know that this relationship exists and the extent to which it is now a part of Union business. A personal relationship is now part of the USAPA payroll and this is without any disclosure or debate.

This stinks to high heaven, Clean it up guys….

Looks like Cleary has violated the code of ethics just as much as Mowrey so apparently there really is no code or requirement to be held accountable to at USAPA (shocking).

1. Did Cleary improperly reveal business secrets when he hired a law firm and filed the status quo case in a NY district court without BPR approval?
2. Cleary is practically the definition of an unnecessary expense. Failing to accept the NIC has resulted in four separate district court cases, none of which has allowed USAPA to move forward with DOH. All of these expenses could easily have been avoided if USAPA closed section 22 with the NIC and negotiated all other sections in good faith. The LOA93 grievance was also an unnecessary and wasted expense.
3. How many times has Cleary bypassed the BPR by implementing his own agenda rather than following their directives? Are not his actions in this regard impeachable?

Everything USAPA does is a waste and a joke. The mere fact that USAPA even has a code of ethics policy is perhaps the biggest joke of all.

 

[Res Judicata]

Everything USAPA does is a waste and a joke. The mere fact that USAPA even has a code of ethics policy is perhaps the biggest joke of all.

Until the sane, rational East pilots fully understand the damage USAPA is causing them, I expect nothing but more of the same. Hell, it took over 40 years to get rid of Ghadaffi the Lybian dictator. But he will be meeting his maker soon enough. In the end Justice will prevail.

 

[cltrat]

Why? You don't think you could have pulled it off?

I'd be willing to make a sizable wager that you couldn't have pulled it off.

 

[Move2CLT]

I'd be willing to make a sizable wager that you couldn't have pulled it off.

Ya? You think so? What do you base that on? You just being a funny tough guy? Getting that dig in to start your day along with your morning dump and coffee?

My mom says I could have done better. She said I could have put it back on the runway in LGA because I'm that good. My mom says I'm the greatest pilot ever. And my mom can kick your mom's ass!

 

[nic4us]

Until the sane, rational East pilots fully understand the damage USAPA is causing them, I expect nothing but more of the same.

Watched the CLT crew news?

2007 hire, says he has no dog in the seniority issue, then complains he gets WIC and 1 day vacation, tells Parker to just pick a side and get sued (i.e. side with usapa and lose). Started off with a rational question, ended up showing complete lack of any rational thinking. The rational answere for his position is to realize he does have a dog in the seniority issue and usapa is beating that dog so that Cleary and cohorts can steal West seniority. What Parker left out in his reply, was that if he picked sides that will not get the 2007 hire a new contract. Side with usapa, AOL injunction bars implementation, side with West, usapa claims impass and seeks self-help.

A320 captain complains he gets paid less than his conterpart on the West, and wants Parker to just forget about everything else and give him parity. Another irrational question. He has repeatedly been told the path to parity. He has chosen to stay on LOA93, yet complains about his choice, completely irrational.

Now I know there are rational east pilots, some post on this thread, but it does not appear there are enough to make a difference.

 

[Reed Richards]

OK, then how many firms did they interview?
Was the alleged "Boinking" going on during the firm selection process?

The following was taken from an old USAPA mailing in the late summer
of 2007. I had to dig it up to find the relevant items. No, there was
no alleged “boinking” going on at that time. But that is a funny word, sounds like what it means. Here you go:


The legal advice that USPA has had regarding the basis of our claim
that a private arbitration award can be set aside or revisited via
negotiations with the company has been verified by all four law firms
we interviewed. Even two ALPA attorneys agreed.

1. Willig Williams and Davidson of Philadelphia

2. Buchannan Ingersoll and Rooney of Harrisburg, PA – A national labor
firm, management oriented-specializing in the Railroad industry.

3. Duane Morris LLP – of Philadelphia

4. Seham Seham Meltz and Petersen – White Plains NY


5. In two instances ALPA attorney’s substantiated USAPA’s claims. In
Dec 2007 at the 4Q MEC meeting in PIT, Marshall Rogers, CLT captain
Rep, asked USAir ALPA attorney Jeff Small the question. In Jan 2008 at
a meeting in DC, Marshall asked the same question to outside hired
counsel Roland Wilder. In both cases the answer was the same. The Nic
was a product of "ALPA policy" and not binding on another union.
Another union could put in place whatever they felt was appropriate
(within bounds of DFR).

 

[Move2CLT]

Not leaning to much one way or another. Long before you started posting I've had what at best could be called reservations with Seeham and his team. I could say much of the same to the west. You've dicked around over NIC now for 6 years and you're in the same financial boat. NOTHING to show for your efforts.

Dicked around over the Nic!?! BoeingBoy's PM regarding you and your past makes your posts a bit more understandable to me. I now know why you post the way you do. Mostly because you're an outsider, a consumer of our product. You have no experience behind the curtain other than what you read here. That's why most of your posts are so way off in fact and logic.

As for Nic, we haven't been dicking around with it. We've been protecting it. Wouldn't you protect an agreement you had if the other party to said agreement tried to change the terms? What if you booked a rental car online and went to pick it up only to find the price went up? You wouldnt fight that?

So, why would you expect the west to merely roll over and allow a binding arbitration to be either modified or erased?

So, are you hypocrite or just plain ignorant? Little of both?

Let us throw mud at each other here with your interference and nput. You have no qualifications. And being a FF doesn't give you any more insight to our issue than it does to any other passenger. You have the FFOCUS thread to hang out at so focus on that.

 

[PullUp]

Watched the CLT crew news?

2007 hire, says he has no dog in the seniority issue, then complains he gets WIC and 1 day vacation, tells Parker to just pick a side and get sued (i.e. side with usapa and lose). Started off with a rational question, ended up showing complete lack of any rational thinking. The rational answere for his position is to realize he does have a dog in the seniority issue and usapa is beating that dog so that Cleary and cohorts can steal West seniority. What Parker left out in his reply, was that if he picked sides that will not get the 2007 hire a new contract. Side with usapa, AOL injunction bars implementation, side with West, usapa claims impass and seeks self-help.

Ok, so if you believe everything DP says then the only thing holding him up is six west pilots. DP is afraid of six west pilots suing him and the company.
That is laughable. The company's law team could and would hamstring any lawsuit and draw it out to infinity and beyond.
If a new contract was negotiated without the Nic list and passed the membership referendum, IMHO the west vote could easily be measured.
If a majority of the west voted for the contract, what complaint would the six plaintiffs have that would prevail in court?
Six guys. Come on, DP. Let's get realistic. The east and west are enhancing the profitability of the company and management would like that to continue for as long as possible.
Cheers.