US Pilots Labor Discussion

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Some have failed to understand how prescient the 9th was when they said USAPA is at least as free as ALPLA was to abandon NIC. Indeed there was a scenario where ALPA would have been entirely free to abandon the NIC. Its really not too hard to figure out but some might not like the inescapable conclusion.

Looking back on it I believe ALPO could have done a better job getting around the Nic for you. Here is a possibility. Somehow the east was brought back to the table and a TA was attained, with the Nic. Assume the east were to vote it down once, twice, who knows how many times and it was obvious(nic) why.

I think ALPO could then have gotten creative, claiming a legitimate union objective, and then forced the west to sue ALPO with it's deep, deep pockets. Plus in such a scenario ALPO would have much more to work with as far as a credible argument in favor of a legitimate objective, as opposed to the laundry list of faux pas usapa comitted that the jury had no problem seeing through.

RR seems to think Prater would have found a way to impose something on you, I think it was in fact the opposite.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Looking back on it I believe ALPO could have done a better job getting around the Nic for you. Here is a possibility. Somehow the east was brought back to the table and a TA was attained, with the Nic. Assume the east were to vote in down once, twice, who knows how many times and it was obvious(nic) why.

I think ALPO could then have gotten creative, claiming a legitimate union objective, and then forced the west to sue ALPO with it's deep, deep pockets. Plus in such a scenario ALPO would have much more to work with as far as a credible argument in favor of a legitimate objective, as opposed to the laundry list of faux pas usapa comitted that the jury had no problem seeing through.

RR seems to think Prater would have found a way to impose something on you, I think it was in fact the opposite.

Maybe so. But the Nic was but one reason to get ALPA off the property. One of MANY.

They might have just sold ALL OF US out to the company, like they'd done in the past.

 

[Reed Richards]

Looking back on it I believe ALPO could have done a better job getting around the Nic for you.

Lynyrd, ALPA could have done a lot more to make this thing work. All speculation on my part..but a few small tweaks to Nic and it just might have flown. We will never really know. But the real truth is, ALPA was simply incapable of dealing with this event. They set up the entire process to keep themselves removed from the outcome. They indeed got the immunity they craved, but it ended up costing them about 8M a year and the loss of two pilot groups. I think they are eventually toast. ALPA will never disappear, but they will be marginalized to the point of not being relevant in the industry. But I despise them, so my opinion is very biased. Despite all our differences, it was ALPA that set the stage for our failure as a unified group..so much so I don't think we can ever be as one.

RR

 

[cleardirect]

I stand by my earlier posts. They include them, in part, to show what the thought process was in coming to the opinion that they arrived at. Even INCOMPETENT lawyers would NEVER use the dissenting opinion as the basis for their case.

You guys are a lost cause. You'll get your bad news soon enough.

Seham and Granth are usapa lawyers right? You did say that dissenting opinions have no meaning right? huh!!!

Lee Seham, Esq.,
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN
SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANT USAPA’S
RULE 12(B) MOTION TO DISMISS

A vigorous dissent by Arbitration Board member Captain James Brucia objected that the Nicolau Award improperly failed to consider post-merger evidence confirming the economic opportunities inherent in the vitality of East operations and higher East pilot attrition rates. (Mowrey Decl. ¶ 17, Ex. C).

DECLARATION OF RANDAL E.
MOWREY

17. Captain James Brucia, a member of the Nicolau Arbitration Board, wrote a dissent to the decision, which explained that the Nicolau Award improperly failed to consider post-merger evidence confirming the economic opportunities inherent in the vitality of East operations and higher East pilot attrition rates. A true and correct copy of Captain Brucia’s dissent is attached to this declaration as Exhibit C.

DECLARATION OF
NICHOLAS PAUL GRANATH

1. The Opinion and Award
On May 1, 2007, the Arbitration Board issued a 35-page Opinion and Award, authored by Chairman Nicolau, integrating the seniority lists of the US Airways and America West pilots; attached was a four-page Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by Captain Brucia and a 36-page integrated seniority list. Defs’ Ex. 26.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Seham and Granth are usapa lawyers right? You did say that dissenting opinions have no meaning right? huh!!!

That's not a court opinion. It also was not the basis of their case, but a method of pointing out the issues in the case, namely that financial conditions of the companies were not considered. Even the Ninth quoted from the District Court, from a case they required to be thrown out. It's one thing to use it to clarify the issues and another to say that it has any bearing on the decision, as you guys are.

Show me where ANYBODY ever says that because someone says something in a dissenting opinion that it has any bearing on anything. It's doesn't. You can argue all day long, you're still wrong.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Lynyrd, ALPA could have done a lot more to make this thing work. All speculation on my part..but a few small tweaks to Nic and it just might have flown. We will never really know. But the real truth is, ALPA was simply incapable of dealing with this event. They set up the entire process to keep themselves removed from the outcome. They indeed got the immunity they craved, but it ended up costing them about 8M a year and the loss of two pilot groups. I think they are eventually toast. ALPA will never disappear, but they will be marginalized to the point of not being relevant in the industry. But I despise them, so my opinion is very biased. Despite all our differences, it was ALPA that set the stage for our failure as a unified group..so much so I don't think we can ever be as one.

RR

In my hypothetical scenario, I think it would have been an entirely different dynamic, in a good way, as far as getting to the point of being one. Perhaps no lawsuit would have been involved after all. It has all the world to do with perception. I'll lay it out through my eyes only, as opposed to speaking for anyone.

In my view, the east used it's greater numbers from the very beginning in what I perceived as an overly aggresive front. In other words, it looked less like the east wanted honest comprimise than it just wanted flat out capitulation to all it's desires before anyone moved forward. That left a less than desirable perception in me that's lasted to this day. It backed both sides into corners.

The different dynamic I refer to in my hypothetical is one more of an honest look at what may have been needed to make it work. In other words the west may have seen that there were honest to goodness issues needing to be addresed. Both sides would have had a better chance of an honest debate, in the center of the room, not from opposite corners.

Or, perhaps the darn contract would have passed the first time for all anyone knows.

 

[cleardirect]

Lynyrd, ALPA could have done a lot more to make this thing work. All speculation on my part..but a few small tweaks to Nic and it just might have flown. We will never really know. But the real truth is, ALPA was simply incapable of dealing with this event. They set up the entire process to keep themselves removed from the outcome. They indeed got the immunity they craved, but it ended up costing them about 8M a year and the loss of two pilot groups. I think they are eventually toast. ALPA will never disappear, but they will be marginalized to the point of not being relevant in the industry. But I despise them, so my opinion is very biased. Despite all our differences, it was ALPA that set the stage for our failure as a unified group..so much so I don't think we can ever be as one.

RR

You make a very valid point. That ALPA set it up to remove themselves from the process. To give themselves immunity. So they would not get sued. What was the first thing usapa did? Put themselves in the middle of the process and got themselves sued. When we get back to DFR II 8 million will be tiny compared to the damages. Now before you going thinking no way damages will happen. Care to look at the MDA suit?

$175 mill. That was for a "minor error" of using the wrong list. Simple mistake maybe. What do you think a 4-5-6 year ongoing effort to implement a seniority system that harms a portion of the list will be worth? Does the MDA case have merit?

At this point ALPA who cares? usapa is the CBA for almost 3 years now. When are you guys going stop looking back and start looking forward? When does it become usapa's fault?

The "tweaking" of the Nicolau has been discussed. I have asked many times but never get an answer. What was the east willing to give not just take to "tweak" the award? So far I have heard nothing!!!

Not that it matters it is to late. Just curious.

 

[Reed Richards]

Seham and Granth are usapa lawyers right? You did say that dissenting opinions have no meaning right? huh!!!

I guess they were wrong in citing the "dissenting opinions" of Judges Nicolau and Burcia. Apples and oranges. The ALPA process was an internal affair, used by ALPA to distance themselves from the result. I don't see Nic or Burcia sitting on any bench.

But your point is well taken, the views of dissenting parties are indeed used by both sides when they want to make a point. I give you that.

RR

 

[cleardirect]

That's not a court opinion. It also was not the basis of their case, but a method of pointing out the issues in the case, namely that financial conditions of the companies were not considered. Even the Ninth quoted from the District Court, from a case they required to be thrown out. It's one thing to use it to clarify the issues and another to say that it has any bearing on the decision, as you guys are.

Show me where ANYBODY ever says that because someone says something in a dissenting opinion that it has any bearing on anything. It's doesn't. You can argue all day long, you're still wrong.

These are your words.

Actually, if you read the quote, it said that it came from the District Court. The main difference is that they quoted the part that indicates that USAPA IS free to abandon the Nic. I would NOT quote the District Court opinion since it has been dismissed, I.e., it never happened. The part that is quoted in the Ninth's opinion, though, is fair game. That is, if it is not in the dissenting opinion, which it is not.

The rest of your post was just more west garbage. If you can't quote the dismissed case, dissenting opinion or make it up, it doesn't get posted by you. You guys ignore tha fact that count, over and over again.

So what is it? Do dissenting opinions have validity or not? The ninth circuit referenced the DISTRICT court does it have validity or not? Would you like to rethink your position about what the ninth said about usapa being as free as ALPA?

I quoted the district court referenced by the ninth. I brought the facts you brought...? Your opinion?

 

[Reed Richards]

In my hypothetical scenario, I think it would have been an entirely different dynamic, in a good way, as far as getting to the point of being one. Perhaps no lawsuit would have been involved after all. It has all the world to do with perception. I'll lay it out through my eyes only, as opposed to speaking for anyone.

In my view, the east used it's greater numbers from the very beginning in what I perceived as an overly aggresive front. In other words, it looked less like the east wanted honest comprimise than it just wanted flat out capitulation to all it's desires before anyone moved forward. That left a less than desirable perception in me that's lasted to this day. It backed both sides into corners.

The different dynamic I refer to in my hypothetical is one more of an honest look at what may have been needed to make it work. In other words the west may have seen that there were honest to goodness issues needing to be addresed. Both sides would have had a better chance of an honest debate, in the center of the room, not from opposite corners.

Or, perhaps the darn contract would have passed the first time for all anyone knows.

Uncharted territory here Lynyrd, and I will try and combine my response to you and Clear about "what it would have taken" to make the Nic work. First, my own situation was that on day one I accepted the award as final, and told my family and friends to do likewise. You may not believe me, but that is the truth. I was glad the two airlines got together, glad to have a job, and accepting of the fact I would never , ever, even with over 30 years be a wide body captain.

It was days later, followed by the march on Herndon that I blew my top...not over my own perceived loss (fair or not) but over the turmoil at the bottom half of the list. It simply did not work, and I don't need to go into all the particulars again. I have grown to despise the award on many more levels as time has passed..but my honest reply is there was a solution early on using LOS and cleaning up the bottom half of our list (and that one was not your fault..but ALPA’s) with straight date of hire. That senile old man Nic did us all disservice by not grasping some of these issues. He was paid well to do just that, and he failed. Shame on him.

Thanks for actual discussion..both of you. It has actually been so long since the award came out, that I am having to do some real thinking about my actual emotions at the time.

Best until tomorrow,

RR

 

[73320]

Huh? A East furloughed pilot has the least invested in the airline with 14+ years service? Your man Dave O'dell really had alot invested, what? a couple weeks.

I was talking about the east side. You are correct about Dave. He did not have much time invested and he was awarded exactly what he had the day before the merger - the bottom position on the list. It is unfortunate that 14 years of service east brought no job but Dave and others did. The solution for the east's plight was to negotiate fences for capturing east attrition. The solution was clearly not to pretend that the west pilots were on the same list as the east pre-merger. The DOH non-solution not only allows the east pilots to capture east attrition but grants them furlough protection that they NEVER had pre-merger, the majority of the gains in a new contract, new flying in addition to other numerous land grabs, and gives the west their long held IOU's for the future. Looks like the west is not a buyer of the east's fairness doctrine.

 

[nic4us]

Yes, you did. They actually said that USAPA was at least as free to abandon the Nic as ALPA, and we know that ALPA didn't feel bound by it (i.e. Rice comminsion, Wye River, etc). AND that you can't file another DFR until there is a RATIFIED contract.

Please stop distorting the facts.

Here is where you are making an enormously incorrect assumption.

You say "ALPA didn't feel bound by it", and as evidence you offer the Rice committee. I say, ALPA felt 100% bound to uphold and defend the Nic, and as evidence I offer the Rice committee.

Prater, in the only act for which I have any respect left for the man, got up in front of an angry east crowd and told you, as president of ALPA he had no legal grounds to reject the Nic. The only means of modifying or "abandoning" the Nic was with the consent of the two parties that entered into the arbitration. Hence, ALPA, in fear of losing the property commissions the Rice committee in an atempt at getting the West Mec to revisit the arbitration to which ALPA, is legally obligated to defend and uphold.

So, as the 9th said, usapa is "at least as free as ALPA" to abandon the Nic. All usapa has to do is talk the West into a compromise, have a legitimate West representational board willing to make that compromise, and then avoid getting sued for DFR by 1800 individual "pilots in the employment of AWA" for breaching the same contracts that brought the Nic in the first place.

Rots of Ruck.

 

[73320]

And since it did not and since everyone on the West was basking in their seniority theft glory........Now 'all' east attrition is protected...

V

Theft implies an act of stealing. The west did not preside over the arbitration so they stole nothing but kept what they had. On the other hand it seems your outfit is the one trying to do the stealing as they are attempting to set matters straight as they see fit without any adult supervision. It would not be a surprise if most neutral observers to the USAPA fiasco considered their actions to be a type of theft. A jury seems to have concluded as much once before in very short order. You may capture some attrition that you MIGHT not have done under the NIC in the short run, but most pilots west were not basking in any glory and they dont seem too interested in your flying. What you have certainly protected is what you brought to the merger. If and when another merger occurs, you will receive a less acceptable outcome in an arbitration than you did the last time. You will be facing an even greater disparity in contract/compensation, outnumbered, outspent, and you will be placed accordingly. Still running backwards right into the future and I am certain most will be stricken by "all" that was lost when once again you thought it was protected. Turn around for a few minutes and look at what lies ahead.

 

[nic4us]

Okay then. You show US where the Nic is still alive. (hint: you can't). Quoting cases that have been dismissed doesn't count.

Since it's gonna take a RATIFIED contract before you can refile a DFR, it's gonna be a while. NO ratified contract will EVER include the Nic. You can take that to the bank.

Easy peasy,

The company filed for a DJ, because the Nic is not only alive, but it is the only accepted system seniority list at LCC, paid for as contractually mandated in the TA. Also got a letter from Parker saying as much, and two deposited $300,000 checks, and ALPA vice-pres Rice as delivering agent, and a whole bunch of pissed off east pilots, to prove just how alive the Nic is.

You got this whole thing backwards oldie. You say "NO ratified contract will EVER include the Nic". But the reality of the current situation is NO tentative agreement will ever include any seniority list other than the Nic.

If usapa remains content with status quo, and never presents that Nic inclusive tentative agreement, they have by definition failed at being a collective "Bargaining" agent.

 

[nic4us]

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?

And if usapa was free to negotiate whatever they wanted, the 9th would have just said that, without all of this,"damages plaintiffs fear'", pain of "unquestionably ripe DFR", and my favorite, "negotiate in good faith for all pilots EAST and WEST", still recognizing the rights of a completely seperate group of "WEST" pilots in the biggest freudian slip of their incredibly bad decision.

What gives the WEST pilots any seperate status. I will tell you. The TA and the Nic. Both contractually entered into by "the pilots in the employment of America West" (i.e. the WEST).

Get used to the Nic, it is all usapa has to offer.