US Pilots Labor Discussion

[prechilill]

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

AOL has only filed one lawsuit and it is sitting at the SCOTUs. Do you know of any others besides Addington?

 

[sumadarson]

OK here are the decisions of the "people that matter"

• ALPA immediately set up the Rice committee and Wye river to change the terms of the seniority decision.
• USAPA immediately changed the proposed integrated seniority list to DOH with C&R's.
• The West pilots have lost two system board grievances claiming a contractual right to try to force the company to use the Nic award for furlough and as a company bargaining position in the next contract.
• The Addington DFR claim and damages claims were both dismissed by the 9th circuit.
• The En Banc appeal to the 9th circuit was rejected.
• The Addington appeal of the 9th circuit's decision back to Judge Wake was dismissed. (surprise)
• The appeal to the Supreme court has even the AOL attorneys telling the West pilots to expect it to fail
• The Addington appeal to Judge Silver is now subject to a rule 11 frivolous filing challenge.
• Any new DFR lawsuit which itself would face impossible odds has to wait until after a DOH seniority list is ratified into a new contract.

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

underpants

Do not forget the rule 60 b attempt by the west attorneys, 28j Jacobs and rule 11 Harper;

THE COURT: But then you have the new case, Airlines
case. All the parties are there including the airlines, which
didn't want to be here, and now they want to be there. That's
a vehicle for full litigation and determination of whatever is
ripe. Other than adding mass to your motion for transfer, what
does this Rule 60b motion do?
MR. JACOB: Again, what I believe it does, is it makes
the record a live record again, that the evidence is evidence
again, that the pleadings, the rulings of the Court, the
orders, are all active and in effect unless they are changed.
THE COURT: Well, that comes as a surprise to me, and
I'm sure it comes as a surprise to Mr. Granath. And none of
that is briefed. So again, it's not briefed, so I don't
purport to offer an answer to that question. But it strikes me
as awfully ambitious, and in any event, you don't have it
briefed.
MR. JACOB: I apologize for that.

Read the transcripts of the oral arguments of transfer and 60 b. The West attorneys prove they are on the road to rule 11. They made fools of themselves. 2 plus million and counting.

Oral arguments for 60b and motion to transfer. Dismissed eventually due to lack of awarness.

 

[prechilill]

Then if the west attorneys are fools, the Nic is dead, seniority is an internal union process- where is the DOH contract? Addington was filed two years ago, USAPA is about three years old and we have not seen a contract. How much longer?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Then if the west attorneys are fools, the Nic is dead, seniority is an internal union process- where is the DOH contract? Addington was filed two years ago, USAPA is about three years old and we have not seen a contract. How much longer?

Don't worry, it's on the way. But glad to see you're finally getting it!

 

[prechilill]

Don't worry, it's on the way. But glad to see you're finally getting it!

Why do you say "I'm finally getting it"? I'm just asking you questions and you answer in vagueries.

Any of you have answers? Three pages of posts and nothing of substance from any of you. If you can't see what's wrong with that you are missing a lot.

 

[sumadarson]

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:


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.

Well said Oldie. You try to talk about apples with some of these west folks and they try to build you a Carman Miranda hat.

Question to you Oldie,

I see the declaratory dismissed after the first of the year, loa 93 50/50. The company will appeal and the NMB will release the parties. The Unions are free to pursue self help which will eventually lead to a legal strike.

What are your thoughts sir?

 

[aquagreen73s]

Don't worry, it's on the way. But glad to see you're finally getting it!

It's on it's way? You sound like the old AAA, back when it had same day jet service! Yeah sure, DOH will be here A N Y D A Y now...it's soooo close.....two and a half years and 8 contract sections closed....heck you'll have a contract the Nic in it by, I don't know, 2025 maybe?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

It's on it's way? You sound like the old AAA, back when it had same day jet service! Yeah sure, DOH will be here A N Y D A Y now...it's soooo close.....two and a half years and 8 contract sections closed....heck you'll have a contract the Nic in it by, I don't know, 2025 maybe?

I don't honestly know. I DO know that it WON'T contain the Nic.

 

[cleardirect]

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:


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.

It is you that has the reading comprehension problem. Let me make it easy on your old eyes

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.

Not the dissenting opinion.

The quotes were from the DISTRICT COURT referenced by the ninth circuit MAJORITY opinion. I quoted the entire FOOTNOTE!

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.

I know the facts get in the way of your view of life but please try and pay attention. (District) (Dissenting) See the difference?

 

[Bear96]

Nobody is challenging the award,

Ya, right. Bullsiht.

Is that why 90% of the posts on these threads have to do with how unjust the award supposedly is and therefore it should be disregarded by the legal system?

Admit it. You guys are trying to relive the arbitration process and get a do-over. It is painfully obvious to everyone that that is ALL you are trying to do, no matter how much you deny it, and that just won't happen, as much as you would like it to.

. . . INTERNAL UNION PROCESSES don't confer to a new CBA.

??

I don't know what that sentence means (translation, please?), but I have a hunch that even if you were making sense, your point would not be relevant.

In any case, decisions resulting from disputes over "internal processes" that an entity / entities agree(s) to resolve through binding arbitration are just as binding as any other arbitration decision.

 

[cactusboy53]

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

Jeez Louise that was fun! Throw a bright colored lure out there, and the lunker strikes at it in a snap! Let's do that again, Pops!

It only took you a few posts to figure out that I used the wrong name. Peddle your stinky fish somewhere elsé.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

It is you that has the reading comprehension problem. Let me make it easy on your old eyes

Not the dissenting opinion.

The quotes were from the DISTRICT COURT referenced by the ninth circuit MAJORITY opinion. I quoted the entire FOOTNOTE!



I know the facts get in the way of your view of life but please try and pay attention. (District) (Dissenting) See the difference?

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.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Jeez Louise that was fun! Throw a bright colored lure out there, and the lunker strikes at it in a snap! Let's do that again, Pops!

It only took you a few posts to figure out that I used the wrong name. Peddle your stinky fish somewhere elsé.

I knew it right away. I thought you would figure it out, but you didn't.

If by "stinky fish" you mean "the truth", no, I intend to keep posting it here, thank you.

 

[Freebird]

I don't honestly know. I DO know that it WON'T contain the Nic.

How does One actually become Cleary's lapdog? Old dog. Same old tricks.



USAPA = Playing on the pipedreams of Oldie and Co.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Well said Oldie. You try to talk about apples with some of these west folks and they try to build you a Carman Miranda hat.

Question to you Oldie,

I see the declaratory dismissed after the first of the year, loa 93 50/50. The company will appeal and the NMB will release the parties. The Unions are free to pursue self help which will eventually lead to a legal strike.

What are your thoughts sir?

I was thinking that the DJ would be thrown out before the end of the year, but that may not happen now. The Judge may be waiting so as not to disturb the fine balance of the airline around the holidays. I give the loa 93 thing about the same odds, maybe a little more to the pilots, because I think that if it were the slam dunk the company says it would have been decided months ago.

I hope that the company negotiates in good faith and that a strike can be avoided. Nobody really wins if that happens. Unfortunately, I'm really not impressed with the talents of AWA management.

We'll see.