Ardenian
Advanced
Dear Captain,
It is quite obvious that you have never sat at the ALPA table. You have no idea what that organization is like.
US Pilots Labor Thread 3/18-3/25-MUST READ FIRST POST
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
It is quite obvious that you have never sat at the ALPA table. You have no idea what that organization is like.
Ardenian
Advanced
Hi Richard,
You are right, I am wrong. I did try calling him once, but he wouldn't take my call.
But I guess it's better than hanging in the bars.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
If the court is just, there should be separate ratification.
Ardenian
Advanced
Speculation often has no resemblance to reality when discussing the courts.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
I could bust a Seeham joke at this point, but I actually agree with you.
While I think that USAPA is essentially a living, breathing, DFR, I do believe that under the framework agreed to in the form of the transition agreement that both sides should have to ratify a contract with Nicolau before the list gets implemented.
If (and I say that loosely) the west and their counsel don't overreach, that's the outcome they ought to actually advocate, because I think it's part of an easy remedy for the judge to arrive at (an injunction essentially saying that Nicolau is the list and that's it's implementation is essentially awaiting independent ratification from both sides).
Well, that an legal fees and some cash and one helluva injunction to keep the Angry FO from Cranberry from continuing to throw Hail Marys...
IOW, sticking to the transition agreement.
That this would also invalidate USAPA's entire raison d'etre is, essentially, a predicted side effect.
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #96
Another day another boneheaded move from the legal strategy team of usapa.
This one could draw the anger of the judge this time. Just who is in charge of strategy?
Document 273 and 274. If this does not get all of the east pilots attention I don’t know what will.
This one could draw the anger of the judge this time. Just who is in charge of strategy?
Document 273 and 274. If this does not get all of the east pilots attention I don’t know what will.
nostradamus
Veteran
- Dec 7, 2004
- 2,038
- 0
It appears that the america west pilots are saying the east pilots are sending them contributions, when 50 percent of the west pilots have not done so. They never mention the transition agreement. Oh well, they are adept at picking cherries.
america west pilots (Tokyo Rose type) update quote;
""On a different note, we would like to share with you a pleasant letter we recently received in our PO Box, postmarked March 11th, 2009:
Clearly this small donation is more symbolic than substantive. What it seeks to reinforce is the notion, often evident in Leonidas communications, that not all East pilots share the view that USAPA's actions are legitimate. In the end though, it is your fight to wage and from where I sit it appears that you are on the right track. Lastly, please forgive my unwillingness to sign this note with anything other than- An East Pilot with a Conscience.
This was not the first contribution to our efforts sent from an East pilot, though the handwritten note within was certainly encouraging. We are beginning to receive East contributions with increasing frequency, and we hope that the trickle of support will soon give way to a flood.
To our friends on the East- we will get through this, and we will work together to make this airline a place we can be proud to be a part of. Management will not help us do this. It will take time, complete commitment and will require maximum effort from all of us, but it can be, and will be done. The decision to begin moving ahead though, is largely your choice to make. You will have to decide to move beyond the seniority award, honor your agreements, and get past the misplaced expectations sold to you by your leadership. ""
Click on the March 22 2009· Read More
america west pilots (Tokyo Rose type) update quote;
""On a different note, we would like to share with you a pleasant letter we recently received in our PO Box, postmarked March 11th, 2009:
Clearly this small donation is more symbolic than substantive. What it seeks to reinforce is the notion, often evident in Leonidas communications, that not all East pilots share the view that USAPA's actions are legitimate. In the end though, it is your fight to wage and from where I sit it appears that you are on the right track. Lastly, please forgive my unwillingness to sign this note with anything other than- An East Pilot with a Conscience.
This was not the first contribution to our efforts sent from an East pilot, though the handwritten note within was certainly encouraging. We are beginning to receive East contributions with increasing frequency, and we hope that the trickle of support will soon give way to a flood.
To our friends on the East- we will get through this, and we will work together to make this airline a place we can be proud to be a part of. Management will not help us do this. It will take time, complete commitment and will require maximum effort from all of us, but it can be, and will be done. The decision to begin moving ahead though, is largely your choice to make. You will have to decide to move beyond the seniority award, honor your agreements, and get past the misplaced expectations sold to you by your leadership. ""
Click on the March 22 2009· Read More
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #98
OK you really lost me with that logic string.
What does the transition agreement have to do with who or how many are contributing.
lynyrdskynyrd
Veteran
- Apr 22, 2005
- 1,182
- 558
I think he lost the link to the original rico complaint, so he's desperately grasping for new material that makes no sense.
Freighterguynow
Veteran
- Jan 5, 2004
- 1,276
- 1,207
Both ALPA Merger Policy and the Transition Agreement bar management from using an integrated list until there is a single collective bargaining agreement for the new merged airline. Your management, both MECs, the pilot groups, and ALPA’s president still need to get an agreement completed before the seniority list can be implemented.
http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/A...4 9&Tabid=251
L
luvn737s
Guest
Of course he can't. He can't even go to a cocktail party because he's stuck at Signature eating stale donuts and drinking yesterday's coffee while waiting for Mr. Big and his bratty 8 year-old son to come back from a Yankees game (the one he could barely see through the fuzzy picture on the TV in the pilots lounge). He should pop in the well-worn VHS of Top Gun and see if he can talk the NetJet guy into another game of pool, double or nothing.
Don't ask me how I know.
The cruel bit of irony is that at any given moment most of the people at Millionair are folks who will never be millionaires.
Metroyet
Veteran
- Nov 1, 2008
- 2,571
- 5,664
Geez, talk about picking cherries. You know full well that AFTER Leonidas requested donations to aide in the certification motion, hundreds of West pilots made their first donation. Currently we're over 85% participation and the number grows daily. We'll never get 100% because let's face it, pilots can be the cheapest people on Earth.
Any idea how the Judge is going to Sanction your hero Seham and company for their latest little stunt over the weekend? Can't wait to find out.
The company is looking to buy another and bigger aircraft, from an automaker.
You are correct, looking for jobs with companies in the headlines will probably yield not a lot of positives.
I am reminded of a line about looking for love in all the wrong places.....IHMO.
hp_fa
Veteran
- Feb 19, 2004
- 3,290
- 178
I just read Docs. 273 and 274.
Doc 273 is another claim that USAPA's counsel need more time to do more discovery in the case because they perceive more issues needing to be prepared for trial in the liability portion of this bifurcated case. This comes despite the Judge's clear instructions and Orders that the case will go to trial on the liability issue on April 28th and that they have had, at least, four months to prepare for trial on liability issues.
Document 274 is a potential bombshell. Plaintiffs' Motion For Protective Order Directing Defendant's Counsel To Respect ER 4.2 and Abstain From Ex Parte Contact With Members of the West Pilot Class asks the Court to remedy an alleged breach of the ethical duty by opposing counsel to not contact person's represented by counsel.
On March 10th the Court, after being fully briefed by respective counsel, issued an Order that granted certified class status to all West pilots in conjunction with the federal litigation now going on in Phoenix. That had the effect of making all West pilots clients of Marty Harper, Kelly Flood and Andrew Jacob, all of the law firm of Polsinelli Shughart, P.C. Plaintiffs allege that on March 22nd West pilot TCP was directly contacted by contacted George Diamantopulos, an associate attorney employed by Seham Seham Meltz & Petersen, LLP. (I only used the initials of the West pilot to not violate the posting policies of US Aviation and because he has not knowingly done anything to identify himself publicly.) According to Plaintiffs' Motion, Mr. Diamantopulos contacted TCP on a cellphone. According to TCP the signal was weak, but he said “So you’re working with the firm I did the affidavit with;’ to which he (Mr. Diamantopulos) replied, ‘yes, but I’m new to the case and have been asked to interview witnesses.†The conversation reportedly went on for an hour. TCP, having thoughts about the true identity of the caller, eventually asked “[d]id the Seham firm hire you?†to which he confessed, “yes.â€
Arizona has the following ethical rule for attorneys. "“In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a party the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized by law to do so.†Ariz. E.R. 4.2.
New York has the following rule. DR 7-104 [1200.35] Communicating With Represented and Unrepresented Parties.
A. During the course of the representation of a client a lawyer shall not:
1. Communicate or cause another to communicate on the subject of the representation with a party the lawyer knows to be represented by a lawyer in that matter unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other party or is authorized by law to do so.
Mr. Diamantopulos is not licensed to practice law in Arizona. He also has not been granted pro hac vice status (Temporary admission to the State Bar of a foreign jurisdiction for the purpose of representing a client under the auspices of a duly licensed member of the State Bar.) He works for the Seham Law Firm and that implicates Mr. Seham and his partners and associates in the alleged impropriety.
So folks ask yourself this. What the heck is going on here? This is a big deal. USAPA, through counsel, is continuing to seek delays and to make an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit, yet seemingly is breaking Court and Bar rules in doing so. They have, as I have previously posted, seeming annoyed Judge Wake and now this allegedly happens and now Judge Wake will have to consider one or more sanctions and that this will all be in the record when the case goes to trial and/or appeal.
What the heck is going on here?
Doc 273 is another claim that USAPA's counsel need more time to do more discovery in the case because they perceive more issues needing to be prepared for trial in the liability portion of this bifurcated case. This comes despite the Judge's clear instructions and Orders that the case will go to trial on the liability issue on April 28th and that they have had, at least, four months to prepare for trial on liability issues.
Document 274 is a potential bombshell. Plaintiffs' Motion For Protective Order Directing Defendant's Counsel To Respect ER 4.2 and Abstain From Ex Parte Contact With Members of the West Pilot Class asks the Court to remedy an alleged breach of the ethical duty by opposing counsel to not contact person's represented by counsel.
On March 10th the Court, after being fully briefed by respective counsel, issued an Order that granted certified class status to all West pilots in conjunction with the federal litigation now going on in Phoenix. That had the effect of making all West pilots clients of Marty Harper, Kelly Flood and Andrew Jacob, all of the law firm of Polsinelli Shughart, P.C. Plaintiffs allege that on March 22nd West pilot TCP was directly contacted by contacted George Diamantopulos, an associate attorney employed by Seham Seham Meltz & Petersen, LLP. (I only used the initials of the West pilot to not violate the posting policies of US Aviation and because he has not knowingly done anything to identify himself publicly.) According to Plaintiffs' Motion, Mr. Diamantopulos contacted TCP on a cellphone. According to TCP the signal was weak, but he said “So you’re working with the firm I did the affidavit with;’ to which he (Mr. Diamantopulos) replied, ‘yes, but I’m new to the case and have been asked to interview witnesses.†The conversation reportedly went on for an hour. TCP, having thoughts about the true identity of the caller, eventually asked “[d]id the Seham firm hire you?†to which he confessed, “yes.â€
Arizona has the following ethical rule for attorneys. "“In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a party the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized by law to do so.†Ariz. E.R. 4.2.
New York has the following rule. DR 7-104 [1200.35] Communicating With Represented and Unrepresented Parties.
A. During the course of the representation of a client a lawyer shall not:
1. Communicate or cause another to communicate on the subject of the representation with a party the lawyer knows to be represented by a lawyer in that matter unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other party or is authorized by law to do so.
Mr. Diamantopulos is not licensed to practice law in Arizona. He also has not been granted pro hac vice status (Temporary admission to the State Bar of a foreign jurisdiction for the purpose of representing a client under the auspices of a duly licensed member of the State Bar.) He works for the Seham Law Firm and that implicates Mr. Seham and his partners and associates in the alleged impropriety.
So folks ask yourself this. What the heck is going on here? This is a big deal. USAPA, through counsel, is continuing to seek delays and to make an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit, yet seemingly is breaking Court and Bar rules in doing so. They have, as I have previously posted, seeming annoyed Judge Wake and now this allegedly happens and now Judge Wake will have to consider one or more sanctions and that this will all be in the record when the case goes to trial and/or appeal.
What the heck is going on here?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
