US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Zone5]

What are you talking about? I was Piedmont. I got screwed by the USAir and PSA SLIs.

My Bad! I (wrongfully) assumed that you were a former PSA pilot. All that talk about commuting from the west coast and what.

Doesn't really matter though, you have acknowledged, that ALPA merger policy is "capable" of getting it wrong! (or at least not "fair") Have you not?

Furthermore, if you really feel that ALPA merger policy "screwed" you with the USAir and PSA mergers, how can you be so adamant that they got it right with the NIC?

seajay

 

[aquagreen73s]

Doesn't really matter though, you have acknowledged, that ALPA merger policy is "capable" of getting it wrong! (or at least not "fair") Have you not?

You do realize that getting it "wrong" or "right" are both mere opinions and that opinions have zero bearing in whether a the result is legal or not.

Furthermore, if you really feel that ALPA merger policy "screwed" you with the USAir and PSA mergers, how can you be so adamant that they got it right with the NIC?

seajay

There's nothing illegal about venting, but I hope that after four plus years on a goose chase that has netted nothing in ameliorating your frustrations that there is ZERO case law supporting an argument that an arbitration can be ignored solely because the majority thinks it's unfair.

 

[Zone5]

Did the parties involved agree to the process?

Did the parties involved accept the result?

OK. As a former PSA pilot, yes? Do you think the PSA USAir DOH merger was "fair" and if not, have you since then, in the interest of "fairness", only bid the a/c category, seat and status which would have been afforded to you, had a more "fair" slotting by relative position ruled the day after the PSA merger?

Keep in mind this is a discussion about "fairness" not about what a bunch of past ALPA MEC's pulled out of their collective butts. I don't recall a rank and file ratification vote by the real parties effected by any of these mergers, specifically, the pilots! I do know that I personally, (as a party involved) NEVER voted yes for ANYTHING Alpo ever saw fit to "allow" me to vote on.

seajay

 

[cleardirect]

How could that be? A SLI in accordance with ALPA merger policy! "Unfair"! 😱

Can you acknowledge that if ALPA got it "wrong" with the PSA merger, just maybe, they got it "wrong" with the NIC? Only seems like a logical possibility, now that you have acknowledged a past mistake of theirs.

The only "fair" definition of a merger of two pilot groups I've ever agreed with personally, is one that pisses off both sides roughly equally. Until and unless the powers that be figure out a way to "massage" the NIC, in some manner, to achieve a result considered by a majority of both pilot groups, to equally suck, then it won't be "fair".

seajay

OK! How does DOH piss off the east pilots? Let alone equally.

You guys went in with DOH and moved slightly to LOS. Now you are back to DOH. The west is pissed off at that. How about the east?

By your own definition DOH is not fair.

 

[Zone5]

You do realize that getting it "wrong" or "right" are both mere opinions and that opinions have zero bearing in whether a the result is legal or not.



There's nothing illegal about venting, but I hope that after four plus years on a goose chase that has netted nothing in ameliorating your frustrations that there is ZERO case law supporting an argument that an arbitration can be ignored solely because the majority thinks it's unfair.

Oh, sure! I realize that concepts like "right", "wrong" and "fair" have nothing to do with whether or not something is ultimately determined to be LEGAL, as this issue will be determined by the lawyers to be, one way or the other (someday). Ask anyone who has ever been sued for divorce. Which is precisely why a SLI issue should NEVER be turned over to a bunch of lawyers. The two MEC's should still be locked in a conference room to this day, negotiating an independently ratifiable agreement which would achieve the elusive goal of pissing both sides off roughly equally, at least enough to pass ratification. Then we would have come up with something that we could all truly just STFU about and moved on.

The cost of FPL and expenses would not nearly be what has been spent to date making Mercedes payments for lawyers and at least the money would have gone to pilots.

seajay

 

[Zone5]

OK! How does DOH piss off the east pilots? Let alone equally.

You guys went in with DOH and moved slightly to LOS. Now you are back to DOH. The west is pissed off at that. How about the east?

By your own definition DOH is not fair.

A straight DOH list would not be fair, agreed. That's why BOTH MEC's should never have punted this SLI to the lawyers in the first place. The PILOTS should have stayed in negotiations until a joint proposal was reached, which could be ratified by both pilot groups independently! Unless WE craft a proposal acceptable to a majority of BOTH groups, it could never be righteous. Nor could it prevail in a DFR from either side. We are where we are and it SUCKS!

seajay

 

[aquagreen73s]

Ask anyone who has ever been sued for divorce. Which is precisely why a SLI issue should NEVER be turned over to a bunch of lawyers. The two MEC's should still be locked in a conference room to this day, negotiating an independently ratifiable agreement which would achieve the elusive goal of pissing both sides off roughly equally, at least enough to pass ratification.

Absolutely agree. I've worked on a few divorces and was lead counsel on one trial. All I can say is if you're going to get divorced, then no matter how bad you think your spouse is, cut a deal. If the other spouse has any concern at all for the kids, then they'll split everything 50/50 and just get the divorce done. The problem with the system is that the way it's designed - no fault - actually doesn't eliminate the desire to be "right." Hence, one spouse will invariably fight to the end. That desire has begotten an entire industry of lawyers, judges, court clerks, mediators, psychologists, financial experts who do nothing but testify in divorces...a whole cottage industry of parasites that will simply drain whatever financial capital the community has.

One note about our situation, East and West. We had a structure under ALPA to at least manifest objections to the SLI in a peaceful way: separate ratification. If the East kept voting a contract down, the onus would have been on Doug to come to the table for more money otherwise we could have sought self help. Instead (and don't take this as a personal shot Zone), the East turned into the bad spouse and went in on the "all or nothing" tactic.

Very unfortunate.

 

[john john]

Is there a point in there somewhere? I couldn't find anything that referred to a merger with anyone.

Jim

Lakefield did the East pilots a big injustice with his statement about liquidation. The truth is that the merger was in the works for many months before it was actually announced.....no liquidation was going to happen......Retirement Systems of Alabama made sure of that when they brought Lakefield, a money manager for Meryl Lynch, out of retirement to line up outside financing for this merger to happen. That was the ONLY reason Lakefield was ever in the game.

The East pilots invested $9 billion to ensure that their jobs would be there in the next month....and now, in 2011, are still there....making the profit for this airline. Liqudate, my butt!

Yes, protecting my position, that I have paid for with LOA93 for almost a decade!

breeze

Quite a fantasy. If you'd care to back any of it up with facts I'd be happpy to read them.

Jim

Merger talks started as early as July 2004
There was a plan rock bottom HP wages benefits and work rules

 

[traderjake]

Did the parties involved agree to the process?

Did the parties involved accept the result?

Yes, when you make a contract with someone you abide by the terms of the contract.

How was it fair to make guys who could not hold Captain at PSA senior to Piedmont Captains?

 

[Phoenix]

And who did you give that to and what do the west pilots have to do with it? You clown scab gave that to the old usairways which ceased to exist when the merger happened. To give you an example I brought a 757 captain seat date of merger with only 7 years on property, of course you scabs don't want to ackowledge that nor the other 140 ac the west brought. You will not win you dirty clown scab, you will live with the cesspool that is loa 93 until the day you retire.

Thanks! Things have been going so well out here on the line that I was beginning to worry that no one was upset with us anymore. Had to come back on this website to find some relief to my fears.

 

[Black Swan]

You do realize that getting it "wrong" or "right" are both mere opinions and that opinions have zero bearing in whether a the result is legal or not.



There's nothing illegal about venting, but I hope that after four plus years on a goose chase that has netted nothing in ameliorating your frustrations that there is ZERO case law supporting an argument that an arbitration can be ignored solely because the majority thinks it's unfair.

Aqua, this is the issue that keeps confounding you. You need to get it straight, this is negotiating stuff, internal union mechanisms. You are trying to continue with the internal union proposal being case law, it is no such animal at all.It is truly amazing that one who purports to be an attorney, and a founder of Leonidas, can continue to pump misrepresentations of the facts, when you know them to be such.You are correct, it is difficult to overturn arbitrations. But arbitrations that are internal union mechanisms and proposals are not case law. Easily changed, as they are merely bargaining proposals, not resolutions. As we saw, the Nicolau was easily dropped, simply by voting in a new bargaining agent,(USAPA) and agreeing to a different mechanism of determining seniority. Once more, again, the 9th Court of Appeals decision.

["i]We note, as the district court recognized, that USAPA is at least as free to abandon the Nicolau Award as was its predecessor, ALPA. The dissent appears implicitly to assume that the Nicolau Award, the product of the internal rules and processes of ALPA, is binding on USAPA. See Diss op. at 8021-22."[/i]

 

[Black Swan]

Yes, when you make a contract with someone you abide by the terms of the contract.

How was it fair to make guys who could not hold Captain at PSA senior to Piedmont Captains?

It's called Date of Hire.

 

[traderjake]

The courts will teach you that DOH is not seniority.

 

[aquagreen73s]

[/u][/i]


Aqua, this is the issue that keeps confounding you. You need to get it straight, this is negotiating stuff, internal union mechanisms. You are trying to continue with the internal union proposal being case law, it is no such animal at all.It is truly amazing that one who purports to be an attorney, and a founder of Leonidas, can continue to pump misrepresentations of the facts, when you know them to be such.You are correct, it is difficult to overturn arbitrations. But arbitrations that are internal union operations are not case law. Easily changed, as they are merely bargaining proposals, not resolutions. Once more, again, the 9th Court of Appeals decision.

["i]We note, as the district court recognized, that USAPA is at least as free to abandon the Nicolau Award as was its predecessor, ALPA. The dissent appears implicitly to assume that the Nicolau Award, the product of the internal rules and processes of ALPA, is binding on USAPA. See Diss op. at 8021-22."[/i]

What you don't understand is the hybrid DFR. The 9th said the West can't sue until there is a ratified contract. The problem with that for the company is that they're now tied into the process. That's the whole reason they filed for declaratory relief in federal court. What's so hard for you to understand about that? Answer why the company should expose themselves to DFR liability just so the East can have a pay raise....

 

[Black Swan]

What you don't understand is the hybrid DFR. The 9th said the West can't sue until there is a ratified contract. The problem with that for the company is that they're now tied into the process. That's the whole reason they filed for declaratory relief in federal court. What's so hard for you to understand about that? Answer why the company should expose themselves to DFR liability just so the East can have a pay raise....

I am not referring to your DFR aspirations. That is not the issue here. The issue is you made a statement that there is case law that an arbitration cannot be overturned. I countered with the 9th ruling that clearly, made it obvious the Nicolau is merely a bargaining position, not binding. You keep coming back, with DFR arguments. I am obviously aware of the possibility of ANYONE being hurt by a seniority integration, not just the west. I am well aware, the 9th said the West may NOT actually be harmed as they fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau. So you may, or may not be harmed by the Nicolau not being used, as it clearly looks like it will not be used by USAPA. So we will all just wait to see what transpires in lets' see, 5-10 years. More from the 9th........


Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the
parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the
CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s
seniority proposal — whatever USAPA’s final proposal ulti-
mately is. Because these contingencies make the claim specu-
lative, the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.


Not yet fit, just like your kid might not yet be fit to make the US Olympic wrestling team. As in might not ever happen.
It could not be any clearer, yet you, and your cohorts cannot get it. Not my fault you continue to chase shadows. I guarantee that Arizona Judge coming up gets it. If she doesn't? The 9th will make it painfully obvious what she HAS to do.