US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Black Swan]

Here is the USAPA victory in THE SUPREME COURT, which UPHELD the appeal of the 9th. And you guys claim all the time USAPA hasn't won anything! They have won EVERYTHING!


No. 10-463
Title:
Don Addington, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Petitioners
v.
US Airline Pilots Association
Docketed: October 7, 2010
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Nos.: (09-16564)
Decision Date: June 4, 2010
Rehearing Denied: July 8, 2010

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oct 5 2010 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 8, 2010)
Oct 22 2010 Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 8, 2010.
Dec 1 2010 Brief of respondent US Airline Pilots Association in opposition filed.
Dec 15 2010 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 7, 2011.
Jan 10 2011 Petition DENIED.


~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioners:
Marty Harper One East Washington Street (602) 650-2000
Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-2568
MHarper@polsinelli.com
Party name: Don Addington, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated
Attorneys for Respondent:
Lee Seham Seham, Seham, Meltz & Petersen, LLP (914) 997-1346
Counsel of Record 445 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 1204
White Plains, NY 10601
lseham@ssmplaw.com

 

[BoeingBoy]

Remember, the majority decision is the ones that make the rules, not the dissenting opinion. And they don't seem too concerned with anybody being harmed.

Odd remarks since it was the majority that wrote those words you like to whistle past...

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

You make far, far more reference to the big HARM word the delicate children cherish so dearly. Unfortunately, the 9th does not seem to be to be as concerned. Remember, the majority decision is the ones that make the rules, not the dissenting opinion. .....

Of course what the 9th did not do is important (they found no harm), but what is more important is what they DID DO. Specifically two things,

1. They left USAPA to bargain with the company to establish a final product...

"We leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR," with the interests of all members in mind.

and 2. They provided a reference to the SCOTUS standard by which the final product will be judged for fairness.

[T]he final product of the bargaining process may constitute evidence of a breach of duty only if it can be fairly characterized as so far outside a ‘wide range of reason- ableness,’ that it is wholly ‘irrational’ or ‘arbitrary.’

Whatever one may think of Seham, those two facts alone are worth every penny he received (oh and the fact that the West likes to badmouth him makes it even better ).

 

[Reed Richards]

Or may not. USAPA's delay of a vote in order to provide what the arbitrator deemed unfair, will be the crux of the next DFR.

Judge Wake (and I heard even the Addington Plaintiffs) stated pre trial that USAPA was not delaying negotiations (thus your supposedly delayed "vote.") That particular argument was rendered moot early on.

But I always say that trial never happened. Guess I better stick to my own logic.

Good luck to you on round two. Remember, the T'way guys are now at the 10 year mark in their DFR quest. And they actually have a good case!

RR

 

[Reed Richards]

Less than that and USAPA risks doing the harm the west fears (you never emphasize that part - wonder why?) and will face an "unquestionably ripe" DFR suit.

Remember the warning from the 9th - represent both sides equally. Pick one side to win and the other to lose and USAPA's toast.

Jim

Ahhh. Your lack of being a good Samaritan during the Empire screw job must be keeping you up at nights. Those guys got beat up pretty bad.

The DOH seniority list will indeed be "unquestionably ripe" for a DFR action by anyone.... once ratified in a contract. Only then will the Courts even make the decision whether or not to go to trial. The Ninth (and then SCOTUS) told us all that, and Judge Silver will too (eventually.) .

Ripeness does not equal guilt.

RR

 

[BoeingBoy]

Remember, the T'way guys are now at the 10 year mark in their DFR quest. And they actually have a good case!

And the Addington class went from initial filing to En-blanc ruling in less than 2 years...

Jim

 

[Reed Richards]

And the Addington class went from initial filing to En-blanc ruling in less than 2 years...

Jim

Yes indeed, thanks to your beloved Empire pilots getting shot down for ripeness in CLT. Did not see that one coming, nor did Wake. Think the stars will align again in DFR II? I don't.

RR

 

[BoeingBoy]

Think the stars will align again in DFR II? I don't.

It's the same stars so I think so. If USAPA was trying to institute the first seniority list at US, I think it'd be completely different. Unfortunately for USAPA, they aren't doing that. They want to overturn an arbitrated award reached by agreement of both sides and accepted by US before USAPA existed.

JimG

 

[Phoenix]

Yes indeed, thanks to your beloved Empire pilots getting shot down for ripeness in CLT. Did not see that one coming, nor did Wake. Think the stars will align again in DFR II? I don't.

RR

One more star to add to the kaleidoscope for a future DFR (if the 9th really means anything) will be a ratification vote in the rear view mirror.

 

[BoeingBoy]

A ratification vote, if less than 100% in favor, won't mean squat. Except maybe that the east has the majority of votes so can control the outcome if they choose. Have union members ever voted 100% for anything?

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

A ratification vote, if less than 100% in favor, won't mean squat. Except maybe that the east has the majority of votes so can control the outcome if they choose. Have union members ever voted 100% for anything?

Jim

Have you already forgotten the vote breakdown of the last vote our entire single pilot group had the opportunity to vote on? If you need to look it up it was on 17 Apr 2008, and because it wasn't 100%, it didn't mean squat, until 18 Apr.

 

[Res Judicata]

Have you already forgotten the vote breakdown of the last vote our entire single pilot group had the opportunity to vote on? If you need to look it up it was on 17 Apr 2008, and because it wasn't 100%, it didn't mean squat, until 18 Apr.

If one guy votes no, and sues uslappy for dfr, history proves he will win. So once again, Jim is correct and you guys are confused.

 

[Phoenix]

If one guy votes no, and sues uslappy for dfr, history proves he will win. So once again, Jim is correct and you guys are confused.

Yeah, he'll win billions and billions (insert Carl Sagan voice) of dollars. He won't live long enough to count them all. History proves it!

 

[BoeingBoy]

You're not usually so evasive, Phoenix. A little worried? A ratification vote in favor of a combined contract won't mean squat as far as a DFR suit is concerned, since that's what was being discussed.

Jim

 

[Move2CLT]

Of course what the 9th did not do is important (they found no harm), but what is more important is what they DID DO. Specifically two things,

1. They left USAPA to bargain with the company to establish a final product...

"We leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR," with the interests of all members in mind.

and 2. They provided a reference to the SCOTUS standard by which the final product will be judged for fairness.

[T]he final product of the bargaining process may constitute evidence of a breach of duty only if it can be fairly characterized as so far outside a ‘wide range of reason- ableness,’ that it is wholly ‘irrational’ or ‘arbitrary.’

Whatever one may think of Seham, those two facts alone are worth every penny he received (oh and the fact that the West likes to badmouth him makes it even better ).

So why hasn't USAPA passed a new seniority list?

Come to think of it, why is USAPA inviting the IBT to make a presentation to the pilot group? Why the merger? Is Cleary looking for a national job?

And where the hell is Pi?!?!