You simple little boy I remember "the wife' along with " the boy" and " the girl" in the 1950's when I visited family in a little steel town. And unless you manage to check out in the next year or so I'll be gone. You wont though, you will still be yanking gear for some p.o.'ed westie until you ??????"The Wife" NEW SCHOOL TERM! Still stuck in the 70's with bell bottoms and disco I see. Hey there is a bee gees concert coming to your town soon. I will see the left seat here sooner than you would like and I am gonna enjoy the hell out of rubbing your nose in it on a daily basis.
I know its just killing you that your precious usloppy FAILED you yet againLOA 93 FAIL, DOH FAIL, ILLEGAL JOB ACTION FAIL, BEGGING PARKER AT EACH AND EVERY CREW NEWS FOR MORE MONEY FAIL. The new legal team has told the merry cleary clowns that further delay will also FAIL!! Wow failure after failure after failure. I can't believe you haven't taken your own life yet. HEY I still have that costo weblink for your final vessel if you want it.
Injunction
US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
You would probably like him to pick up that bar of soap you lost.
Request no. 2
What the "F" is a " jackwagon". Every knows you are a liar now your a bull$$$$$$ You seem to put your mouth in motion before you brain ( as small as it is) is in gear. Dont respond to this until you answer my question.
Sounds like this is day 28.
cactusboy53
Veteran
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 2,649
- Reaction score
- 7,407
What's it have to do with JohnJohn's (the Non-pilot?) post. Nothing. It was a rant on the BS ride that USAPA & the USAPA supporters have taken us through. Desperate? No. Just your garden variety rant. Life is good generally speaking. Some serious time off with pay very soon. 😀 The lawyers are true blue & great guys. They are giving a briefing tomorrow night. Wish I could be there. They haven't promised the moon & taken the cheese like some unscrupulous legal firms might do....
.Like Mic says....Time is on my side. By the time this finishes and the Nicolau is implemented, I will have my choice between reserve Captain in PHX or mid-senior line holding narrow body Captain in PHL, CLT or DCA.
Cheers!
luvthe9
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 9,464
- Reaction score
- 14,119
Are those AOL folks telling you guys that? Most west pilots realize the the NIC is never going to happen. But it is OK to keep wishing.
By the time the nic is implemented you will be a grandfather and your choice will be drive thru or counter... OK cacti boy sorry I picked on you I'll give you one. NYSE: GNRC or GENERAC HOLDING make yourself a few bucks for your retirement your gonna need it.
What's it have to do with JohnJohn's (the Non-pilot?) post. Nothing. It was a rant on the BS ride that USAPA & the USAPA supporters have taken us through. Desperate? No. Just your garden variety rant. Life is good generally speaking. Some serious time off with pay very soon. 😀 The lawyers are true blue & great guys. They are giving a briefing tomorrow night. Wish I could be there. They haven't promised the moon & taken the cheese like some unscrupulous legal firms might do....
Like Mic says....Time is on my side. By the time this finishes and the Nicolau is implemented, I will have my choice between reserve Captain in PHX or mid-senior line holding narrow body Captain in PHL, CLT or DCA.
Cheers!
What's it have to do with JohnJohn's (the Non-pilot?) post. Nothing. It was a rant on the BS ride that USAPA & the USAPA supporters have taken us through. Desperate? No. Just your garden variety rant. Life is good generally speaking. Some serious time off with pay very soon. 😀 The lawyers are true blue & great guys. They are giving a briefing tomorrow night. Wish I could be there. They haven't promised the moon & taken the cheese like some unscrupulous legal firms might do....
Like Mic says....Time is on my side. By the time this finishes and the Nicolau is implemented, I will have my choice between reserve Captain in PHX or mid-senior line holding narrow body Captain in PHL, CLT or DCA.
Cheers!
Well, at least you can admit what it was!
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
Like the way you wish for a LOA 93 win so you don't have to put a NIC contract to a vote?
Last Wednesday, November 2nd, Judge Silver ruled against USAPA and granted US Airways’s Motion for Class Certification of the West pilots. Judge Silver also ordered USAPA to withdraw their counter claim or add the West class as a defendant. This class certification order was issued not too long after Judge Silver’s order from October 11th which set December 1st as the date for the scheduling conference. Additionally, just yesterday attorneys for the West class filed a motion asking Judge Silver to grant the expansion of the West class representatives from six individual pilots to nine. We are adding three new class representatives and are pleased to announce them to you.
Supplementing the six original plaintiffs are: Mike Soha (P0040), Rod Brackin (P0406) and George Maliga (P1146). The same six West pilots from DFR I (the Addington trial) are back: Don Addington (P2065), Roger Velez (P1727), Mark Burman (P2228), Afshin “AC” Iranpour (P3040), John Bostic (P3152), and Steve Wargocki (P3121). The six have become nine and these nine pilots will be the tip of the spear in the company’s declaratory action. You can read the latest filing here.
Captains Soha, Brackin and Maliga emphatically accepted their invitations to become named plaintiffs. In fact, all three of them barely let Jeff finish the sentence asking them to consider becoming named plaintiffs before they answered “yes, Ill do it!” If you know Captains Soha, Brackin and Maliga, you will know that none of them are shy when it comes to their support of our efforts to defend the seniority of every West pilot. Captain Soha summed it up plainly when he told Leonidas, “If one West pilot is harmed, we’re all harmed.” We agree, and the problem here goes well beyond one pilot being harmed. All West pilots are being harmed by USAPA’s efforts to evade the seniority arbitration and instead implement a seniority list which favors the majority of East pilots at the expense of the West pilots.
Even Captain Soha, (seniority number 10), is harmed more by USAPA's proposal than he is under the Nicolau. Using the Nicolau Award, Captain Soha drops from number 10 to 440 on an updated list (pilots removed from list that are no longer on property), but that isn't good enough for USAPA. They want Captain Soha pushed all the way down to 761. The Nicolau Award drops Captain Brackin from present day seniority number 123 down to 763 and once again - that isn’t good enough for USAPA. USAPA's proposal places Captain Brackin all the way down to 2023 - a relative decrease of 32%. For 49 year old George Maliga who (current seniority number 397), Nicolau moved him down to 1361. Yet under USAPA’s fanciful DOH list, Captain Maliga, (who has been a captain for more than 16 years), drops to 3208 - a relative decrease of 37%. Additionally, USAPA's DOH proposal places hundreds of East pilots of equal or younger age who were on furlough in 2005 and who are currently flying as First Officer (many of which would never be captains under stand alone operations), far ahead of Captain Maliga.
The harm to the West from USAPA’s DOH plan is obvious even at the top end of our list and serves as yet another example of why the West case is so easy to prove. We believe that USAPA knows their fantasy of replacing the Nicolau with something the majority thinks is acceptable will never pass the scrutiny of a court. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be expending so much effort trying to convince the east pilots themselves that the Addington case is dead and meaningless. Last Wednesday’s order granting class certification crushes the hope that USAPA’s history of bad faith representation of the West will not be an issue. USAPA’s history of bad faith will be a focus of the company’s declaratory action.
First, the granting of class certification was a necessary prerequisite to the adjudication of the company’s declaratory action. Without class certification, a result from the declaratory action would be binding on only one of the named plaintiffs thereby rendering the litigation virtually useless in terms of settling anything. For example, consider the company’s third claim. If, by some miracle the company was granted blanket immunity to negotiate (i.e. won on Claim III) without the West being certified as a class, then the result would be useless as the remaining 1700 + West pilots could subsequently sue since they would not be bound by the result. This is why class certification was important. Understandably, the company moved for Judge Silver to certify the former AWA pilots as a class and we filed a motion in support of class certification shortly thereafter.
Predictably, USAPA opposed class certification all along and this makes sense if you are trying to avoid actual litigation of whether USAPA is acting in bad faith by avoiding the Nicolau in favor of a scheme that benefits every East pilot at the expense of every West pilot. What was bizarre about USAPA’s opposition to West class certification was that their opposition was coincident with their support for the company’s Claim III. It is understandable why USAPA would want the company to prevail on Claim III since blanket immunity would pave the way for the company to accept USAPA’s dream of a cost-neutral contract in exchange for DOH. The problem with this scenario is that a win for the company on Claim III would be meaningless without the West being certified as a class. Any law student with the lowest of LSAT scores could discern the irreconcilability of the two positions.
This brings us to our second point regarding Judge Silver’s class certification order- the clarity in which she summarized the company’s complaint:
“US Airways seeks one of the following three determinations:
1) USAPA’s seniority proposal (i.e., strict “date of hire”) breaches its duty under the Railway Labor Act and its duty of fair representation and US Airways cannot adopt it;
2) USAPA’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty under the Railway Labor Act and its duty of fair representation and US Airways may adopt it; or
3) US Airways will not be liable to the West Pilots regardless of which seniority proposal it adopts.” Doc. 125, pg.
The essence of the company’s declaratory action is USAPA’s duty to fairly represent its constituents. Ergo, this case will look back to the facts of Addington. We suspect this comes as quite a shock to the East after their general counsel (now former general counsel) spent considerable effort convincing them that Addington was dead and nothing more than a “legal nullity.” Remember how fond Seham was of his “dying embers” metaphor when referencing our efforts? With Judge Silver’s order from last Wednesday, it must be apparent to even the most delusional DOH believer that those “dying embers” just flashed into a major conflagration. Then again maybe they do not understand this which is also part of the problem. Since the DFR claim lives with the company's litigation, so too does the evidence from Addington. Last February, Judge Silver touched upon the idea of importing evidence from the Addington trial. Doing so would greatly speed the adjudication of the declaratory action. The company expressed no misgivings to importing relevant evidence from Addington- nor did the West. Not surprisingly, USAPA was dead-set against importing anything from Addington. We expect that this will be a major issue at the scheduling conference on December 1st.
One more note: the difference between the declaratory action and Addington is the party asking the question to the court. We questioned whether USAPA breached its DFR when it unequivocally vowed to replace the Nicolau with DOH, and Judge Tashima said that we can’t ask that question until there is a completed contract. Here, it is the company asking the question of USAPA’s duty to fairly represent in regards to the Nicolau. When one considers the gravity of the important issue being adjudicated here and in the original Addington case, then it might seem to be a trivial distinction as to whether the company or the union members ask the question. The Ninth Circuit says that when union members ask it, then they cannot do so until there is a ratified contract. This case, however, has the company asking the same question as in Addington but with a slight difference: what is US Airways's potential liability for agreeing to a seniority list that is not the Nicolau? Even with that difference, the crux of the case is the same: USAPA's duty to fairly represent the West pilots in light of USAPA's commitment to disregard a binding arbitration and instead implement a DOH seniority scheme which happens to benefit every East pilot and harm every West pilot. That is the issue which will be tried. Last time it took a jury of nine only a few hours to make the determination. This time the presiding judge will make the determination.
Finally, we are compelled to point out an inaccuracy in USAPA’s legal update of November 3rd. In that update, USAPA stated, “[t]he central issue in the Declaratory Judgment action is whether or not USAPA is required to implement the Nicolau Award.” No. The issue is not implementation. The issue is USAPA’s duty to fairly represent (see the excerpt from the order above). It is correct to say that implementation follows whatever is found to be a breach (or not a breach) of USAPA’s duty to fairly represent, and therefore implementation is dependent upon the results of the declaratory action. But, that is entirely different than what USAPA said in its update. By deceptively characterizing the issue as one of implementation, USAPA is once again trying to disguise bad-faith representation as a union’s freedom to negotiate. It’s nothing more than USAPA's trademark “bait and switch tactic.” Four years, one jury and two federal judges later (Judge Wake and Judge Conrad), it has yet to work.
In closing, we would like to point out that the only reason the West is still standing is because of you – the West pilot. When you get up in the morning and look in the mirror, understand that the person staring back at you is the problem for both Parker and USAPA. Life would have been a lot easier for both – and would still be a lot easier for both - if you would just simply give up as they surely expected you would do four years ago.
Together, this is our struggle.
Don’t forget about the attorney meet-and-greet on November 11th at 5PM. This is your time to speak to your attorneys.
Sincerely,
Leonidas, LLC
www.cactuspilot.com
Supplementing the six original plaintiffs are: Mike Soha (P0040), Rod Brackin (P0406) and George Maliga (P1146). The same six West pilots from DFR I (the Addington trial) are back: Don Addington (P2065), Roger Velez (P1727), Mark Burman (P2228), Afshin “AC” Iranpour (P3040), John Bostic (P3152), and Steve Wargocki (P3121). The six have become nine and these nine pilots will be the tip of the spear in the company’s declaratory action. You can read the latest filing here.
Captains Soha, Brackin and Maliga emphatically accepted their invitations to become named plaintiffs. In fact, all three of them barely let Jeff finish the sentence asking them to consider becoming named plaintiffs before they answered “yes, Ill do it!” If you know Captains Soha, Brackin and Maliga, you will know that none of them are shy when it comes to their support of our efforts to defend the seniority of every West pilot. Captain Soha summed it up plainly when he told Leonidas, “If one West pilot is harmed, we’re all harmed.” We agree, and the problem here goes well beyond one pilot being harmed. All West pilots are being harmed by USAPA’s efforts to evade the seniority arbitration and instead implement a seniority list which favors the majority of East pilots at the expense of the West pilots.
Even Captain Soha, (seniority number 10), is harmed more by USAPA's proposal than he is under the Nicolau. Using the Nicolau Award, Captain Soha drops from number 10 to 440 on an updated list (pilots removed from list that are no longer on property), but that isn't good enough for USAPA. They want Captain Soha pushed all the way down to 761. The Nicolau Award drops Captain Brackin from present day seniority number 123 down to 763 and once again - that isn’t good enough for USAPA. USAPA's proposal places Captain Brackin all the way down to 2023 - a relative decrease of 32%. For 49 year old George Maliga who (current seniority number 397), Nicolau moved him down to 1361. Yet under USAPA’s fanciful DOH list, Captain Maliga, (who has been a captain for more than 16 years), drops to 3208 - a relative decrease of 37%. Additionally, USAPA's DOH proposal places hundreds of East pilots of equal or younger age who were on furlough in 2005 and who are currently flying as First Officer (many of which would never be captains under stand alone operations), far ahead of Captain Maliga.
The harm to the West from USAPA’s DOH plan is obvious even at the top end of our list and serves as yet another example of why the West case is so easy to prove. We believe that USAPA knows their fantasy of replacing the Nicolau with something the majority thinks is acceptable will never pass the scrutiny of a court. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be expending so much effort trying to convince the east pilots themselves that the Addington case is dead and meaningless. Last Wednesday’s order granting class certification crushes the hope that USAPA’s history of bad faith representation of the West will not be an issue. USAPA’s history of bad faith will be a focus of the company’s declaratory action.
First, the granting of class certification was a necessary prerequisite to the adjudication of the company’s declaratory action. Without class certification, a result from the declaratory action would be binding on only one of the named plaintiffs thereby rendering the litigation virtually useless in terms of settling anything. For example, consider the company’s third claim. If, by some miracle the company was granted blanket immunity to negotiate (i.e. won on Claim III) without the West being certified as a class, then the result would be useless as the remaining 1700 + West pilots could subsequently sue since they would not be bound by the result. This is why class certification was important. Understandably, the company moved for Judge Silver to certify the former AWA pilots as a class and we filed a motion in support of class certification shortly thereafter.
Predictably, USAPA opposed class certification all along and this makes sense if you are trying to avoid actual litigation of whether USAPA is acting in bad faith by avoiding the Nicolau in favor of a scheme that benefits every East pilot at the expense of every West pilot. What was bizarre about USAPA’s opposition to West class certification was that their opposition was coincident with their support for the company’s Claim III. It is understandable why USAPA would want the company to prevail on Claim III since blanket immunity would pave the way for the company to accept USAPA’s dream of a cost-neutral contract in exchange for DOH. The problem with this scenario is that a win for the company on Claim III would be meaningless without the West being certified as a class. Any law student with the lowest of LSAT scores could discern the irreconcilability of the two positions.
This brings us to our second point regarding Judge Silver’s class certification order- the clarity in which she summarized the company’s complaint:
“US Airways seeks one of the following three determinations:
1) USAPA’s seniority proposal (i.e., strict “date of hire”) breaches its duty under the Railway Labor Act and its duty of fair representation and US Airways cannot adopt it;
2) USAPA’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty under the Railway Labor Act and its duty of fair representation and US Airways may adopt it; or
3) US Airways will not be liable to the West Pilots regardless of which seniority proposal it adopts.” Doc. 125, pg.
The essence of the company’s declaratory action is USAPA’s duty to fairly represent its constituents. Ergo, this case will look back to the facts of Addington. We suspect this comes as quite a shock to the East after their general counsel (now former general counsel) spent considerable effort convincing them that Addington was dead and nothing more than a “legal nullity.” Remember how fond Seham was of his “dying embers” metaphor when referencing our efforts? With Judge Silver’s order from last Wednesday, it must be apparent to even the most delusional DOH believer that those “dying embers” just flashed into a major conflagration. Then again maybe they do not understand this which is also part of the problem. Since the DFR claim lives with the company's litigation, so too does the evidence from Addington. Last February, Judge Silver touched upon the idea of importing evidence from the Addington trial. Doing so would greatly speed the adjudication of the declaratory action. The company expressed no misgivings to importing relevant evidence from Addington- nor did the West. Not surprisingly, USAPA was dead-set against importing anything from Addington. We expect that this will be a major issue at the scheduling conference on December 1st.
One more note: the difference between the declaratory action and Addington is the party asking the question to the court. We questioned whether USAPA breached its DFR when it unequivocally vowed to replace the Nicolau with DOH, and Judge Tashima said that we can’t ask that question until there is a completed contract. Here, it is the company asking the question of USAPA’s duty to fairly represent in regards to the Nicolau. When one considers the gravity of the important issue being adjudicated here and in the original Addington case, then it might seem to be a trivial distinction as to whether the company or the union members ask the question. The Ninth Circuit says that when union members ask it, then they cannot do so until there is a ratified contract. This case, however, has the company asking the same question as in Addington but with a slight difference: what is US Airways's potential liability for agreeing to a seniority list that is not the Nicolau? Even with that difference, the crux of the case is the same: USAPA's duty to fairly represent the West pilots in light of USAPA's commitment to disregard a binding arbitration and instead implement a DOH seniority scheme which happens to benefit every East pilot and harm every West pilot. That is the issue which will be tried. Last time it took a jury of nine only a few hours to make the determination. This time the presiding judge will make the determination.
Finally, we are compelled to point out an inaccuracy in USAPA’s legal update of November 3rd. In that update, USAPA stated, “[t]he central issue in the Declaratory Judgment action is whether or not USAPA is required to implement the Nicolau Award.” No. The issue is not implementation. The issue is USAPA’s duty to fairly represent (see the excerpt from the order above). It is correct to say that implementation follows whatever is found to be a breach (or not a breach) of USAPA’s duty to fairly represent, and therefore implementation is dependent upon the results of the declaratory action. But, that is entirely different than what USAPA said in its update. By deceptively characterizing the issue as one of implementation, USAPA is once again trying to disguise bad-faith representation as a union’s freedom to negotiate. It’s nothing more than USAPA's trademark “bait and switch tactic.” Four years, one jury and two federal judges later (Judge Wake and Judge Conrad), it has yet to work.
In closing, we would like to point out that the only reason the West is still standing is because of you – the West pilot. When you get up in the morning and look in the mirror, understand that the person staring back at you is the problem for both Parker and USAPA. Life would have been a lot easier for both – and would still be a lot easier for both - if you would just simply give up as they surely expected you would do four years ago.
Together, this is our struggle.
Don’t forget about the attorney meet-and-greet on November 11th at 5PM. This is your time to speak to your attorneys.
Sincerely,
Leonidas, LLC
www.cactuspilot.com
You're speaking for west pilots now? You couldn't be more wrong. Most west pilots have faith that in the end Nic will prevail via the justice system. That's why you can count on the fact that there will be NO COMPROMISE with the east. We will let the court decide.
Please don't attempt to speak for the west again. It's insulting.
Injunction junction
Advanced
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2011
- Messages
- 158
- Reaction score
- 169
YES it was unprovoked. I posted in general terms you went personal but hey we can go round and round as this is enjoyment for me to poke fun at the circus clowns.
Injunction
Injunction junction
Advanced
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2011
- Messages
- 158
- Reaction score
- 169
1950's you're not dead yet?? Hey you look up tha costco webpage I think the silver casket would look good with you in it and its priced very well within the loa93 budget! I can help you choose if you like.
Injunction
A320 Driver
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Messages
- 3,358
- Reaction score
- 2,319
I've been thinking about this. Maybe USAPA needs to change it's position to accepting the NIC, but with enough conditions and restrictions so as not to cause harm to the East pilots. Let the East pilots capture the attrition on the East and fence them away from PHX. How's that grab you?
Driver B)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
