Nic,
Your analysis misses one important fact and that is that the Nicolau Award was not appealable. The only way that it could of been overturned was if there had been some form of gross application of existing ALPA merger policy. East argued that to the ALPA Executive Board and the Award was eventually confirmed after the proceedings at Herndon, the Rice Committee, Wye River and the Blue Ribbon Committee. Frankly, I believe ALPA waited too long to present the Award to the Company, but that is my opinion.
East failed to meaningfully negotiate a seniority list that differed from DOH/LOS. When West did not accept that position both parties agreed to place their dispute to a third-party and accept the results. When Nicolau did not provide DOH/LOS, but rather a blended seniority list, USAPA was born in order to create an avenue to use the majority of East pilots with the form of seniority list they wanted instead of what was contained in the Award. If there were any doubts about this they were erased when Bradford's correspondence to other pilots and attorneys was introduced into evidence at the Addington trial.
The real questions you should be asking should be directed to Jack Stephan. Why did the East MEC not attempt to negotiate anything other than DOH/LOS? Why did they instruct Mr. Freund to continue with that position even at the 11th Hour after Mr. Nicolau asked East and West for revised positions? Was Mr. Stephan so wedded to his position that he feared to actually lead East where it really needed to go instead of worrying about his future electablity?
HP,
As I have previously indicated, the
real issue for the courts is not the Nicolau, or even this DFR suit. The
real issue needs to be addressed at a higher court than a local district court anyway. The appeal to the 9th (or even Supreme court) is a more fitting venue for the
real issue at hand. Do you have any idea what that issue is? I ask because your response to my post indicates to me that you are not seeing the much larger picture at hand.
For cleardirect: I made no
promise...I said I'd revisit after the remedy. I felt compelled to share a few thoughts that deserve consideration. That my posts bother you certainly is no concern of mine.
Back on point: the disclosure by Tiger1050 expressing concerns over the west vulnerability going forward being salved by the Nic is a testament to why "snapshots" or "PID"'s shouldn't have a place in union seniority...period. Snapshots are but a moment in time (one that can easily be manipulated by management) via furloughs, or strong profits...or even weak profits..or even losses...depending on what they are trying to achieve. Weak profits, or losses and furloughs are standard procedure going into section 6 talks....conversely, strong numbers mysteriously appear when it's time to look for money on the street.
These wildly fluctuating scenarios are not part of AFA's seniority process, or ANY other national and numerically large employee union in this country....including all the others on this property.
While the union will continue to attempt to secure a contract going forward with a reluctant company, we will have seperate ops as described in the TA...
USAPA will soon be able to present the
real issue going forward at the appellate level or higher.