US Pilots Labor Discussion

[oldiebutgoody]

ALPA could abandon the Nicolau? Would that be ALPA national? ALPA east? ALPA west? Would that have been east and west with mutual agreement?

ALPA did feel bound by the arbitration. That was the reason for the meetings. If ALPA COULD have dumped the Nicolau they would have. Kept the property no more problems. Throw the west under the bus it is over. No ALPA could not dump arbitration.

You really should read and research what the ninth meant by USAPA was as free as ALPA was. ALPA was not therefore usapa is not.

That's a stretch. If that's what they meant, they would have just said "USAPA is not free to abandon the Nic." They SURE didn't say that. And what, pray tell, were the Rice commission and Wye River all about?

 

[FL430]

So getting in line for government loans makes AWA bad? We got the loans. We used the money and we began to pay back the money with the PROFITS that we were then making. AWA holdings then ACQUIRED the former US Air and took on that debt, and began paying that debt down.

AWA didnt acquire jack! It was a merger and Bruce Lakefield lined up the financing and handed over the company to Doug. AWA didnt have the money to buy an A330.


I do not consider Parker or Kirby industry experts. It is funny that you choose to use Parker & Kirby's statements when it suits you. I was referring to experts such as R. W. Mann (to name just one).

I dont consider them experts either but they should at least know how much they have in their checking accounts right?
Even more so than even you or Mr Mann.
To quote John Adams: "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

Cite quotes all you want - you have no facts and you are still wrong.

 

[westcoastflyer]

Just read the latest NAC Negotiations Update posted on the USAPA website. They supposedly "negotiated" for four days last week. Through all of the wordy descriptions of what went on, I can't seem to find ONE thing that they came to an agreement on. This is simply getting ridiculous - what on earth is the mediator doing to move this along? The company is obviously stalling, USAPA also seems to be stalling, the mediator is apparently doing nothing, and the pilots (especially on the East) continue to operate under the worst contract in the industry.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Got news for ya Catfish; we use it every day.

V

V , gotta agree and will continue to, man did we move on the last bid or what? Can't wait for the summer ramp up! MM!

 

[prechilill]

Because they want protection from the AOL strategy of filing malicious and frivolous lawsuits. I don't think it's gonna work for them.

Oh. Did the company tell you this?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Right back at you, Pennywistle. I just love the hyperbole and revisionist history that you and your pals spew on this forum. It will be the subject of folklore for years to come.

By the way, the character's name you keep butchering is "Pennywise" not pennywistle. You can't even get THAT right.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Oh. Did the company tell you this?

Uh, yea. I had the vice president of bluewater on the jumpseat from timbuktu to shangra la the other day. He told me that his cousin lives next door to Ed Bular. Yea, that's the ticket.

 

[prechilill]

Uh, yea. I had the vice president of bluewater on the jumpseat from timbuktu to shangra la the other day. He told me that his cousin lives next door to Ed Bular. Yea, that's the ticket.

Well, it sounds like you are full of it based on that response. Lcc doesn't fly to AFrica. Thanks

 

[Bear96]

The West has the burden of proof and claims the Nic award is binding but has failed in every attempt to prove it.

By the way, your notion of burdens of proof is bass ackwards.

The burden of proof is squarely on the party challenging the validity of an arbitration award, if that is where you are going.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Well, it sounds like you are full of it based on that response. Lcc doesn't fly to AFrica. Thanks

I just thought I would use west logic and integrity to answer your question. Actually, one minor correction of your post. Shangra La is a fictional place, thought to be located in Tibet, which is in Asia. You weren't wrong, just not complete.

 

[cleardirect]

That's a stretch. If that's what they meant, they would have just said "USAPA is not free to abandon the Nic." They SURE didn't say that. And what, pray tell, were the Rice commission and Wye River all about?

“that USAPA is at least as free to abandon the Nicolau Award as was its predecessor, ALPA.”

This is the phrase that you east guys love to lean on. It is from a FOOTNOTE not even in the body of the opinion.

It is also important to put that statement into context. This is the sentence and footnote. What this sentence says is that MAYBE usapa can find something that the west would agree with. But usapa can not impose. Notice the word FINAL. They did not say that the current proposal was OK or not a DFR.

Additionally, USAPA’s final proposal may yet be one that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award.3

3 We do not address the thorny question of the extent to which the Nicolau Award is binding on USAPA. 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.

You will also notice that the Ninth Circuit referenced the district court. A quick word search of the words “abandon” and “free” in the district court documents will give this footnote further context.

To this extent—an extent as limited and minimal as it is important—the Nicolau Award constrains USAPA as a preexisting discharge of its duty, not to be abandoned without justification.

The Airline has accepted the Nicolau Award, expressing no opposition to it, and the union has failed to show any legitimate reason (or plausible future reason) for abandoning it.

The Transition Agreement resolved the union’s internal seniority conflict by way of the Nicolau Award, which USAPA wholly abandons solely to benefit one group of pilots over another.

(Guess that kind of covers the internal union dispute thing)

On May 13, 2009, the jury found in Plaintiffs’ favor that USAPA had breached its duty by abandoning an arbitrated seniority list in favor of a date-of-hire list solely to benefit one group of pilots at the expense of another

.

USAPA relies heavily on the following stipulation: “The parties to the Nicolau Arbitration were stated to be ‘the US Airways Pilot Merger Representatives and the America West Pilot Merger Representatives.’” USAPA suggests that the Nicolau Award bound only the merger representatives, with the sole effect of precluding those representatives from asserting the existence of any disagreement between them regarding the Nicolau Award. The award, according to USAPA, was imposed on the East Pilots without their consent; ALPA, and by extension USAPA, remained free to order its affairs as though the award had never happened.
This argument offends common sense, the evidence, and fundamental principles of law. In the context of labor rights, it is both discordant and irrelevant. Generally, properly appointed representatives acting within the scope of their authority do bind those they represent.

The court reasoned that the arbitration process was fair and the arbitrators’ award definitive under ALPA policy. Id. at 216. “If ALPA were free to ignore the merged seniority list, the employees of the post-merger airline would have very little job security” and “disputes over seniority would fester—as they have done in this case.” Id.

So if you would like to reference a phase from the ninth you had better know what you are referring to. The ninth referred to the district court. The district court said “If ALPA were free to ignore the merged seniority list, the employees of the post-merger airline would have very little job security” and “disputes over seniority would fester—as they have done in this case.”

So faced with the facts would you like to continue to say that usapa can ignore the Nicolau? Or as the ninth and the district court said abandon? Nowhere did any court say that ALPA or usapa could abandon anything.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

By the way, your notion of burdens of proof is bass ackwards.

The burden of proof is squarely on the party challenging the validity of an arbitration award, if that is where you are going.

Nobody is challenging the award, since it doesn't apply. INTERNAL UNION PROCESSES don't confer to a new CBA.

 

[prechilill]

I just thought I would use west logic and integrity to answer your question. Actually, one minor correction of your post. Shangra La is a fictional place, thought to be located in Tibet, which is in Asia. You weren't wrong, just not complete.

Timbuktu is in Africa. Can you give a straight answer though? How long before your DOH contract? And you said the Nic is dead, but why are you still worried about it?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

This is the phrase that you east guys love to lean on. It is from a FOOTNOTE not even in the body of the opinion...



...
So if you would like to reference a phase from the ninth you had better know what you are referring to. The ninth referred to the district court. The district court said “If ALPA were free to ignore the merged seniority list, the employees of the post-merger airline would have very little job security” and “disputes over seniority would fester—as they have done in this case.”

So faced with the facts would you like to continue to say that usapa can ignore the Nicolau? Or as the ninth and the district court said abandon? Nowhere did any court say that ALPA or usapa could abandon anything.

You guys keep quoting from the DISSENTING opinion, which means NOTHING. Here's what the Court's opinion said. You know, the one that counts:

From the Ninth's opinion, pg 8008, footnotes:
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.

There's more, but you can read it yourself (I think). I do see that there may be some reading comprehension issues for some of you guys.

You guys keep misquoting cases or using quotes from the dissenting opinion. Pretty dumb way to make your case.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Timbuktu is in Africa. Can you give a straight answer though? How long before your DOH contract? And you said the Nic is dead, but why are you still worried about it?

No worry here. Just lovin' life. It's taking a while to get a contract because of all the frivolous lawsuits AOL keeps filing.