traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
You didn't help me steal your job, it's your own fault.
US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
You didn't help me steal your job, it's your own fault.
Freebird
Veteran
Our fault? How? Cant wait to hear this. You've heard that someone has been threatened? By who USAPA? You girls are hilarious with your rumor mongering. Check this out; I heard Cleary is vacationing in Monte Carlo using your dues money. Truth? or Rumor? Which do you believe? I suppose you'll believe anything since you support USAPA.
Never reneged? Funny. Then what do you call not honoring Binding Arbitration? Reneging.
USAPA = Slow learners, big dreamers.
Freebird
Veteran
That sounds like a good plan. Have USAPA ask for a separation of the airline at the next meeting with Parker. That will go over well. After all USAPA has a ton of influence and support.
Despite what you or the other 94% want, we are one big happy family now. If you are not professional enough to handle that then this is the wrong place for you. Maybe you can go fly for Freedom with Crimi. You can educate all the other pilots you fly with about what its like being furloughed over and over at a crap airline.
Until then, you should turn a new leaf and honor your agreements. Heck you might even make a few friends in the process.
USAPA = Learning the hard way. At the East pilots expense.
Freebird
Veteran
Is it a fact that the East and West agreed to Binding Arbitration?
USAPA = Wanna make a deal?
sumadarson
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2010
- Messages
- 851
- Reaction score
- 905
9th Circuit Court findings the west does not want the uninformed to know about.
“Plaintiffs (west pilots) seek to escape this conclusion by framing
their harm as the lost opportunity to have a CBA implementing
the Nicolau Award put to a ratification vote. Because
merely putting a CBA effectuating the Nicolau Award to a
ratification vote will not itself alleviate the West Pilots furloughs,
Plaintiffs have not identified a sufficiently concrete
injury.2 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.”
767, boeing boy, f/a bear96,
Your thoughts please gentlemen.
“Although we do not hold that a DFR claim based on a
union’s promotion of a policy is never ripe until that policy
is effectuated, we conclude that, in this case, there is too much
uncertainty standing in the way of effectuation of Plaintiffs’
harm to warrant judicial intervention at this stage. Cf. Sergeant
v. Inlandboatmen’s Union of the Pac., 346 F.3d 1196,
1200 (9th Cir. 2003) (examining Labor Management Reporting
and Disclosure Act issue “in light of the well-established
federal policy of avoiding unnecessary interference in the
internal affairs of unions and according considerable deference
to the interpretation and application of a union’s rules
and regulations”).4”
“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.’
“By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain
in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members
— both East and West — in mind, under pain of an unquestionably ripe
DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.”
“2Plaintiffs’ (west pilots) alleged hardship cannot instead be premised on any delay
caused by USAPA in reaching a single CBA. As the district court noted,
Plaintiffs abandoned their claim that USAPA is intentionally delaying
negotiation of a CBA. Addington, 2009 WL 2169164, at *22 (“During discovery,
Plaintiffs retreated from any notion of deliberate delay on the part
of USAPA.”).”
One more thought on a quote;
“ ….under pain of an unquestionably ripe
DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.”
west interpretation of the above quote;
You die joe. We win. The court gave USAPA one more chance to act. As soon as you guys have a contract your gone.
Year 2011, contract with DOH and C& R accepted by the company, west files DFR II suit, lasts 10 years, west ends up suing themselves.
“Plaintiffs (west pilots) seek to escape this conclusion by framing
their harm as the lost opportunity to have a CBA implementing
the Nicolau Award put to a ratification vote. Because
merely putting a CBA effectuating the Nicolau Award to a
ratification vote will not itself alleviate the West Pilots furloughs,
Plaintiffs have not identified a sufficiently concrete
injury.2 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.”
767, boeing boy, f/a bear96,
Your thoughts please gentlemen.
“Although we do not hold that a DFR claim based on a
union’s promotion of a policy is never ripe until that policy
is effectuated, we conclude that, in this case, there is too much
uncertainty standing in the way of effectuation of Plaintiffs’
harm to warrant judicial intervention at this stage. Cf. Sergeant
v. Inlandboatmen’s Union of the Pac., 346 F.3d 1196,
1200 (9th Cir. 2003) (examining Labor Management Reporting
and Disclosure Act issue “in light of the well-established
federal policy of avoiding unnecessary interference in the
internal affairs of unions and according considerable deference
to the interpretation and application of a union’s rules
and regulations”).4”
“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.’
“By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain
in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members
— both East and West — in mind, under pain of an unquestionably ripe
DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.”
“2Plaintiffs’ (west pilots) alleged hardship cannot instead be premised on any delay
caused by USAPA in reaching a single CBA. As the district court noted,
Plaintiffs abandoned their claim that USAPA is intentionally delaying
negotiation of a CBA. Addington, 2009 WL 2169164, at *22 (“During discovery,
Plaintiffs retreated from any notion of deliberate delay on the part
of USAPA.”).”
One more thought on a quote;
“ ….under pain of an unquestionably ripe
DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.”
west interpretation of the above quote;
You die joe. We win. The court gave USAPA one more chance to act. As soon as you guys have a contract your gone.
Year 2011, contract with DOH and C& R accepted by the company, west files DFR II suit, lasts 10 years, west ends up suing themselves.
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 2,627
- Reaction score
- 945
How thick is your skull? I am honoring binding arbitration. The one that ALPA used to arrive at an ALPA bargaining position. Now they can present it to whomever they wish.
You guys just keep making stuff up. That remark about Cleary is not only a lie, it's slander. That is actually a prosecutable offense.
Year 2011, another year of seperate ops.
usapa still spins wheels, accuses the company of intentionally delaying. Cleary calls judge Silver a biased desert judge, in his Seham choreographed video message to the pilot group explaining why usapa can't get a contract until the company meets their illegal demands.....and oh...its all on LOA93 pay and work rules.
West enjoys min fleet protection, confounds usapa's DOH seniority theft for another year, and gets to gloat when Seham gets sanctioned and has to pay Polsinelli Shughart under a rule 11 finding.
sumadarson
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2010
- Messages
- 851
- Reaction score
- 905
Not true. The fact is he is vacationing in a used 1983 Monte Carlo that the union provided him. The west pilots subsequently filed suit, accusing USAPA of not using fuel efficient automobiles.
There is no need for ALPA to make any further presentations of the seniority list combining the pilots of the former USAirways with the pilots of America West Airlines, that was arrived at through a lengthy process that concluded with a binding arbitration between the two groups.
ALPA has already presented the list to the new company, who accepted said list in fulfillment of their contractual obligations.
It is all past tense there Oldie. Done deal. My contract says ALPA merger policy, your contract says ALPA merger policy, the TA says ALPA merger policy. That policy was followed, completed and fulfilled. The Nic is the only combined system seniority list at LCC.
The only thing keeping the company from using it is the same TA that specifies its creation. A joint contract does not ratify the Nic, a joint contract implements the Nic. The Nic itself is already ratified, endorsed, approved, whatever term you care to use.
Seham is absolutely wrong, it is not like negotiating crew meals, it is not amendable at the whims of a malcontent majority group. usapa has absolutely zero chance of changing that award, want to know why? I am going to tell you anyway.
By getting itself elected, usapa took on the task of having to represent the WEST pilots, and their contracts. My contract says ALPA merger policy, what does yours say?
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
Just astonishment that anyone on the East can even quote what the 9th said while still ignoring what they meant...
Jim
usabusdriver
Advanced
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2007
- Messages
- 205
- Reaction score
- 113
Oldie,
How do you come to the conclusion that ALPA did not feel bound by the Nic because of the Rice commission and the other meetings? ALPA felt bound to the Nic unless a NEGOTIATED agreement was reached. If ALPA did not feel bound to the Nic, why was it presented to the company sans any modifications as requested? ALPA did not change the Nic for fear of a DFR suit, plain and simple, because it is binding.
sumadarson
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2010
- Messages
- 851
- Reaction score
- 905
Your point please sir?
Freebird
Veteran
You are honoring Binding Arbitration? The Nicolau Award? Which one are you honoring? Didnt USAPA inherit the previous CBA's agreements? LOA93 and Conract 2004.
Your remark about hearing that a pilot was threatened for working with USAPA is a lie and slanderous towards the West. Keep up.
USAPA = Head in the sand.
sumadarson
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2010
- Messages
- 851
- Reaction score
- 905
"9th said while still ignoring what they meant..."
What are you talking about ffocus boy?
"I didn't really say all the things I said."
Yogi Berra
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
