US Pilots Labor Discussion

[OTTER574]

Just keep on watching, the real fun hasn't really started yet but soon...... 😀

All I can say is, save it for the Federal Judge....

usapa in a Federal court room defending itself.... 😛


OTTER

 

[flybynite]

Hehe🙂

 

[mikey60]

I left AWA and took the flight bennies and went out and made 2.5X the salary. You move up when you can, the opportunities were not there. Wasn't dumped. In the non union entitlement world, you have to personally perform and do your job well, you don't get promotions for just being in the job a year longer. I won't bore you with it, but its about responsibility and proving yourself. And not answering to some collective. I have a job that is not reliant on one industry, its quite nice, you have flexibility. 😀

I wouldn't consider fliping burgers at Micky D's a career advancement

 

[FL430]

Ok, it's quite obvious FL430 is a dateless tween working the boards.

HaHaHa
You make this so easy you are just not worthy of my time.

OK, so you make this accusation of me so lets make a little comparison. Look at our respective total number of posts and make your own determination of who is the "twit" working the boards.

That in itself is proof enough. Get a life mover!

 

[FL430]

L;
After I read this post, I decided to review the transcripts of Judge Silver's proceedings last February. While we can't truly predict what she will do, these snipits may lead us to an educated guess:

(To Mr. Siegel) THE COURT: What would you have argued to the Ninth Circuit had you been a party? You're in front of the Ninth Circuit now. What would you have argued that would change the complexion of the case? It seems to me, as I've read the case again and again, that the majority opinion was -- they were adamant about taking the position, which is supported by the case law, that they are to defer where there are collective bargaining agreement negotiations. So they were just going to keep away from that no matter what. No question the Court embraced the issue that there was harm to the West Pilots. That was clear. Nonetheless, they were not -- still, this was something that could be negotiated and they felt it would be negotiated and even though US Air was not present, that it still could be negotiated so why is it any different?




(To Seham) THE COURT: So we have -- so, okay. We have Johnny-come-lately here and so they are now before me and they are now asking for a declaratory judgment. And I'm looking to see whether or not the Supreme Court of the United States decision gives me that discretion in a private-party situation as opposed to a government situation. And I'm trying to drag out of the Supreme Court decision that they are saying that this case is not different, that all of the issues that were raised in the Ninth Circuit decision on behalf of the company to establish that they were harmed are the same ones that are being brought to me now. It doesn't seem to make any difference to me that they are bringing it to me now.

Judge Silver has just a couple things in front of her, and basically it is the question of whether the company can be held harmless IF they choose to use a list other than the unmodified Nicolau list. Judge Silver has thoroughly read all of the Addington case files, AND will be using said files to craft her decision. Of that you can be sure.

IMHO.

CB53:

There is no doubt that Silver has read and re-read the information you present. You can also rest assured that she has read the opinion of the ninth circuit. I would venture to say that she will tell the company that they know the right thing to do to elicit labor peace as she expounded on previously. To me she is insinuating that the company will simply have to pay their way out of this - give wage increases to buy votes if you will. Ultimately when you get right down to it with regards to the Nic; it is the unions responsibility to avoid the DFR from the west. It is the unions responsibility to represent its members, not the company. In light of my belief in this it is my estimation that she will not give the company the get out of jail free card that they desire, but will also not specifically say the Nic will have to be the list either. I think her parting words will probably echo the unquestionably ripe sentiments that the ninth alluded to. Just my .02

Thank you for your coherent and constructive posts.

 

[Move2CLT]

HaHaHa
You make this so easy you are just not worthy of my time.

OK, so you make this accusation of me so lets make a little comparison. Look at our respective total number of posts and make your own determination of who is the "twit" working the boards.

That in itself is proof enough. Get a life mover!

Once again. What is the difference between lose and looser!

And apologize!

 

[Res Judicata]

CB53:

There is no doubt that Silver has read and re-read the information you present. You can also rest assured that she has read the opinion of the ninth circuit. I would venture to say that she will tell the company that they know the right thing to do to elicit labor peace as she expounded on previously. To me she is insinuating that the company will simply have to pay their way out of this - give wage increases to buy votes if you will. Ultimately when you get right down to it with regards to the Nic; it is the unions responsibility to avoid the DFR from the west. It is the unions responsibility to represent its members, not the company. In light of my belief in this it is my estimation that she will not give the company the get out of jail free card that they desire, but will also not specifically say the Nic will have to be the list either. I think her parting words will probably echo the unquestionably ripe sentiments that the ninth alluded to. Just my .02

Thank you for your coherent and constructive posts.

Not quite. True the dfr is against the union. What uscaba and shesham failed to mention is the fact that it would be patently illegal for us airways to benefit from a new contract that would be found a dfr. Guess what? It has ALREADY BEEN FOUND a dfr. That's why the DJ action. The company isn't dumb enough to touch this with a 10 foot pole unless they get immunity....something they're NEVER going to get.

 

[Move2CLT]

CB53:

There is no doubt that Silver has read and re-read the information you present. You can also rest assured that she has read the opinion of the ninth circuit. I would venture to say that she will tell the company that they know the right thing to do to elicit labor peace as she expounded on previously. To me she is insinuating that the company will simply have to pay their way out of this - give wage increases to buy votes if you will. Ultimately when you get right down to it with regards to the Nic; it is the unions responsibility to avoid the DFR from the west. It is the unions responsibility to represent its members, not the company. In light of my belief in this it is my estimation that she will not give the company the get out of jail free card that they desire, but will also not specifically say the Nic will have to be the list either. I think her parting words will probably echo the unquestionably ripe sentiments that the ninth alluded to. Just my .02

Thank you for your coherent and constructive posts.

And the company will not risk being involved in a hybrid DFR and will thus not move off the Nic.

Keeping the Nic is a 100% guarantee the company will not be involved in a DFR.

 

[FL430]

Once again. What is the difference between lose and looser!

And apologize!

You are the looser and I have lost interest. Hows that?

No apology needed.

 

[cactusboy53]

CB53:

There is no doubt that Silver has read and re-read the information you present. You can also rest assured that she has read the opinion of the ninth circuit. I would venture to say that she will tell the company that they know the right thing to do to elicit labor peace as she expounded on previously. To me she is insinuating that the company will simply have to pay their way out of this - give wage increases to buy votes if you will. Ultimately when you get right down to it with regards to the Nic; it is the unions responsibility to avoid the DFR from the west. It is the unions responsibility to represent its members, not the company. In light of my belief in this it is my estimation that she will not give the company the get out of jail free card that they desire, but will also not specifically say the Nic will have to be the list either. I think her parting words will probably echo the unquestionably ripe sentiments that the ninth alluded to. Just my .02

Thank you for your coherent and constructive posts.

Oh I get it. Sooooo, you're saying that to "elicit peace" we need to all dig deep in our wallets for our hard earned cash and simply give it all to the many misanthropic hoard that camps out on Wall Street...RIGHT?

So we don't do the right thing, the ethical thing or the legal thing. We simple pander to the larger group (and attempt to bribe the smaller group) to get general "labor peace". I guess we'll just see what justice is delivered.

 

[FL430]

And the company will not risk being involved in a hybrid DFR and will thus not move off the Nic.

Keeping the Nic is a 100% guarantee they company will not be involved in a DFR.

"they" company? Oh master of the English language.

 

[Move2CLT]

I wouldn't consider fliping burgers at Micky D's a career advancement

Surprising considering you think LOA 93 is not so bad.

 

[Move2CLT]

You are the looser and I have lost interest. Hows that?

No apology needed.

Lost interest in having an intelligent thought? Yep, you sure have.

 

[Move2CLT]

"they" company? Oh master of the English language.

Quick in the trigger tonight, eh boo boo?

 

[bagchucker]

This #### is funny! Guys making 6 figure incomes , flying our planes everyday, having Jerry Springer-like drama! NICE!