US Pilots' Labor Thread 6/30-7/7 KEEP ON TOPIC-NO PERSONAL COMMENTS

Status
Not open for further replies.

Megasnoop

Veteran
Jun 4, 2005
556
0
North Philly
Then your side tried to weasel out of it by forming a new union. And then you went to court and lost. So, you will agree to NIC.

The 9th court of appeals will decide if we lost, not this chat board. If we lose, then the NIC will be in all future TAs, no matter how many get voted down. Meanwhile, we’ve got LOA84 pay rates, $70 M, pension investigation to look forward to. Your future is staring at a permanent fence. Nothing USAPA can do, because USAPA can’t negotiate with the Addington 6. Remember, “the award is the award†(if the 9th says so). Get the record straight, it was ALPA that spent over $1M and its last 11 months on property trying to “weasel out†of the NIC. Such a fine example of “unionism†and "integrity" to copy. Why didn’t you DFR ALPA when you had the chance?

Lots of folks on furlough wanted my job when the merger happened, USAPA founders are on record saying why they deserve to take my job. Now it seems they have sucessfully stolen some 142+ West jobs, and continue the fight to take more.

Nic4, when the merger happened, who was on furlough? From what airline? “Sucessfully stolen.†More flamebait. Please quote where the USAPA founders went on record saying they deserve to take your job.

Snoop was right, for a short time USAPA will have West money to persue their attack of the West, but the backlash resulting from their misguided theivery has caused irreparable harm, and will strengthen the divide between the two groups.

Right now we’re just fighting your ALPA-Gate conspiracy. You file a motion, we counter-file. Denying jump-seats and comments like “misguided thievery†are what causes irreparable harm and strengthened the divide between the two groups.

As a seperated yet combined group we have furloughed out of seniority and there are east pilots working while there are West pilots senior to them furloughed( these same pilots were furloughed at the merger and are now working while the employed West pilots at the time of the merger are furloughed), there are also displaced West pilots who are now in F/O seats and F/Os who have never upgraded who all are senior to the junior east captains. This translates into the stealing of jobs.

“Stealing of jobs?†More flamebait. If any jobs were stolen, they were stolen by the company. USAPA grieved this. We lost, even though your own grievance guru, Mxxxx Vxxxx, said we did an excellent job. Arbitrator ruled LCC within its rights to furlough as they did. Care to rephrase who stole what jobs?

USAPA spews the same union rhetoric as ALPA or any other organized group, the difference is they are not organized. The latest "lets get an industry leading contract talk" coming from both sides to further their arguement is laughable. Right now the best we can hope for is 78% of an industry standard contract ( a 30% raise for the east) and we will not even get that as long as USAPA is at the wheel. It will be contract 2000 and LOA93 for the duration of USAPA's fight to enhance east positions at the expense of the West.

Oxymoron, “organized labor.†Your right, “industry leading contract talk†is a joke. 78% was the Kirby offer. That gone now. We’ll get our raise from LOA93, the wage concession expiration part. Then we’ll be making 30% more than the west. But we’ll keep fighting to get you parity, even if it means the NIC (under court order, of course).
 
OP
Richard

Richard

Veteran
Dec 15, 2005
2,084
2
The name calling will stop now--no more calling unions "organized crime", no more insulting work groups by misspelling their names (ALPA is just that, not ALPO or ALPOOO).

Please stay on topic.

Thank you.
 

traderjake

Veteran
Aug 30, 2002
5,670
9,310
www.usaviation.com
Meanwhile, we’ve got LOA84 pay rates, $70 M, pension investigation to look forward to. Your future is staring at a permanent fence.

Nic4, when the merger happened, who was on furlough? From what airline? “Sucessfully stolen.â€￾ More flamebait. Please quote where the USAPA founders went on record saying they deserve to take your job.

“Stealing of jobs?â€￾ More flamebait. If any jobs were stolen, they were stolen by the company. USAPA grieved this.

Looking forward to LOA 84 payrates just like you were looking forward to a DOH contract.

When you make an East Reserve F/O senior to a West Captain you're stealing that Captain's job.

When you furlough a thousand West pilots before you furlough the first East pilot you are stealing a thousand jobs.

Just cause USAPA won't admit it doesn't change that fact.
 

Megasnoop

Veteran
Jun 4, 2005
556
0
North Philly
3 days without posting, all that pent-up demand.

That Union was unfortunatly ousted by a mob of cry baby members AND NON MEMBERS from usair and replaced with an organization that has recently been found guilty of NOT representing me or any other former America West Pilot. I had the integrity to pay my dues to ALPA and they had the integrity to represent me. uspa has zero integrity, has been found guilty in a Federal Court for DFR, so why in the world would I pay for no representation unless I had a gun put to my head to do so which is the case here. usappa convienently demands enforcment of our section 29, which I honored for many years, yet won't honor the transition agreement.I pay my dues now because I'm forced to, period.
Who are the ones that really lack integrity?

Such harsh words, eastpus. “mob, cry baby, found guilty, zero integrity, found guilty.â€￾ I guess your passing on the Labor Day Unity Picnic? Good to hear you had integrity. Honoring the transition agreement is what this all boils down to, something ALPA didnt do. Does a new union have to honor the decisions of the old union? The 9th will decide. Or maybe they wont. Worse scenario for both sides is that the 9th rules the case wasn’t ripe and throws it out. Then what? USAPA “testsâ€￾ the waters with a No-Nic contract? Hmmm. If that happens, does AOL try to raise another $2M and sue again? (1mil to pay for the new case, the other 1mil to pay their attorneys form that first case) This could be weird. What do you think, hp_fa?


What is going to happen when the West folks join and they and the moderates will control at least 35% of the votes? What happens if the East objectors decide to join so they can vote against USAPA?

35%? That still leaves 15% short majority. Their less than 14 delinquents in PHL and not many more non-members. The list reads like a whos-who in ALPA-FPLosers. There arent enough East objectors even with all the west pilots to get 50%. Even in their best days, west only had 82% alpa MIGS (that came from 2005 DOL report, so not made up).

You can say "majority rules" and thank you for the dues contributions, but is that the real scenario?

Alternatively, what happens when some objectors decide to legally question the germane issue as far as USAPA litigation expenses in connection with the DFR litigation? Megasnoop has posted that he reads the Ellis case as allowing for those funds to be deemed germane. I am not sure that I agree that his interpretation is correct under the prevailing circumstances in the Addington and RICO litigations.

Major rules the real scenario until the 9th speaks. Then, based on their rulings, no telling how this will continue to play out. Germane, non-Germane is the next battle. DH, LS, DB, CM and their ALPA hanger-ons are already working that angle. Looks like we get to spend more germane mx fee money to find out if Addington/RICO are germane. While that debate goes on, most will pay up in full or face being 29 fired. If they dont pay in full, at best theyll remain objectors with no vote.
 

700UW

Corn Field
Nov 11, 2003
37,637
19,488
NC
A new union has to honor by law any existing CBAs and Arbitration awards, changing unions does not relieve it of the obligations, as you just saw a Federal Jury ruled on it.

And don't think LOA84 payrates are a walk in the park, back in 93 we had very strong snapback language and had to take it to arbitration and believe or not we lost, this was IAM M&R, the arbiter ruled that since the company did all the unions the same way and no one snapped back that we weren't entitled to the snapback even though the language stated" at the end of the pay freeze we would be placed on the next step as if we never had taken a cut and freeze upon the ending of the one year concessions"

Stranger things have happened when it comes to arbitration.

ALPA and the NLRB
 

UtterlyUdder

Senior
Contributor
Jun 14, 2008
277
27
The name calling will stop now--no more calling unions "organized crime", no more insulting work groups by misspelling their names (ALPA is just that, not ALPO or ALPOOO).

Please stay on topic.

Thank you.

Richard, if it is alright with you, I'd like to ad substituting the word "guilty" for "liable". I know you know that the term "guilty" applies to a criminal lawsuit and "liable" refers to a civil lawsuit. I think it is insulting to use the word "guilty" when referring to the DFR lawsuit.
 

nic4us

Veteran
Jun 1, 2008
5,432
10,010
Do you, and I mean very honestly, actually imagine that AWA would still be flying, had this monstrously mismanaged "merger" not taken place? If so....Why?..and on what basis? Specifics would be greatly appreciated.

I mean no nonsensical BS as to who supposedly "saved" who, as it's my guess neither would yet be in business.

Well, for starters we were not in bankrupcy when the merger happened. AWA had been shopping merger partners ala ATA and probably others in the timeframe immediately proceeding the merger. Project "zanzibar" or whatever worse case scenario would not have been needed if the West turned in the numbers they did following the merger when we still kept seperate accounting. Perhaps when fuel spiked it could have dealt a terminal blow, but by that time things get even more speculative. Frontier is still flying although it looks like Republic will own them. So who knows what would have happened to AWA sans merger?
 

nic4us

Veteran
Jun 1, 2008
5,432
10,010
Seriously, on a purely pragmatic basis, without meaning any insult = How would/does it get any worse than it has been/is?

I had a great comeback for this, but upon further consideration, you might be right.
 

Pilot692

Member
Sep 1, 2004
73
10
A new union has to honor by law any existing CBAs and Arbitration awards, changing unions does not relieve it of the obligations, as you just saw a Federal Jury ruled on it.

And don't think LOA84 payrates are a walk in the park, back in 93 we had very strong snapback language and had to take it to arbitration and believe or not we lost, this was IAM M&R, the arbiter ruled that since the company did all the unions the same way and no one snapped back that we weren't entitled to the snapback even though the language stated" at the end of the pay freeze we would be placed on the next step as if we never had taken a cut and freeze upon the ending of the one year concessions"

Stranger things have happened when it comes to arbitration.

You guys= change of control. Lost (and should not have-but it is what it was)

US= A fixed contractual item with a start date, and an end date.
 

700UW

Corn Field
Nov 11, 2003
37,637
19,488
NC
Um no, 1993 was the date, read my post again, it was from the concessions we took in 1992 after we went on strike.

Nothing to do with the change of control.
 

hp_fa

Veteran
Feb 19, 2004
3,290
178
Such harsh words, eastpus. “mob, cry baby, found guilty, zero integrity, found guilty.â€￾ I guess your passing on the Labor Day Unity Picnic? Good to hear you had integrity. Honoring the transition agreement is what this all boils down to, something ALPA didnt do. Does a new union have to honor the decisions of the old union? The 9th will decide. Or maybe they wont. Worse scenario for both sides is that the 9th rules the case wasn’t ripe and throws it out. Then what? USAPA “testsâ€￾ the waters with a No-Nic contract? Hmmm. If that happens, does AOL try to raise another $2M and sue again? (1mil to pay for the new case, the other 1mil to pay their attorneys form that first case) This could be weird. What do you think, hp_fa?

Sorry for the delay in responding Mega. The first time I sped over this I missed the question.

I agree that what you propose would be a worst case scenario. However I don't think it will happen. ** If ** the 9th Circuit were to agree that the issue was not ripe I still do not think that they would remand this case, but rather write some dicta for future cases and yet not delay this case any further. In my opinion, the real best case for USAPA is that it wins on some still unknown issue (since the brief has not been finalized and submitted) and that is a significant enough issue for the 9th Circuit to reverse and remand back to the trial court. (They won't take Judge Wake off the case.) The problem with that, from USAPA's perspective, is that it still has to face a jury and any significant deviation by a witness from previous testimony would potentially be perjury. Also, unless he quits and moves out of the country, Mr. Bradford will be formally invited to any retrial. That would be ugly.

35%? That still leaves 15% short majority. Their less than 14 delinquents in PHL and not many more non-members. The list reads like a whos-who in ALPA-FPLosers. There arent enough East objectors even with all the west pilots to get 50%. Even in their best days, west only had 82% alpa MIGS (that came from 2005 DOL report, so not made up).

Yes, but in a psychological warfare aspect it would start and continue a trend where USAPA is steadily losing the strength of it's majority. The more that happens the more the strident forces will dig in and continue to alienate the more moderate of the union members who only want the best contract they can get and go to work.

You didn't ask what I think is the smartest thing USAPA could do, but I will share that with you anyway.

The smartest thing USAPA could do is to accept Nicolau and end the in-fighting. Stop wasting time and resources and go after the real target, the company. All the pontificating about waiting for an appellate decision is wasting both time and money. Saying that USAPA is fighting on principles is $$$ to the company's ears and. at the same time, probably causing members to question their USAPA leadership.

The second smartest thing USAPA could do is fire SSM&P. (I know, that is a second opinion/freebie.) SSM&P really hasn't seemed to be giving good advice. By USAPA continuing to solict and follow that advice doesn't speak well of the USAPA leadership, does it?

OK, I am done giving out freebies now....

Major rules the real scenario until the 9th speaks. Then, based on their rulings, no telling how this will continue to play out. Germane, non-Germane is the next battle. DH, LS, DB, CM and their ALPA hanger-ons are already working that angle. Looks like we get to spend more germane mx fee money to find out if Addington/RICO are germane. While that debate goes on, most will pay up in full or face being 29 fired. If they dont pay in full, at best theyll remain objectors with no vote.

The problem with the germane/non-germane issue is that it doesn't give people the sense that USAPA is honorable or fair since they are seemingly stretching the boundaries of what non-members are being assessed as fees that supposedly are directly attributable to the services those non-members receive from USAPA. Neither the Addington nor RICO case have any bearing on services rendered to non-members and trying to collect those monies from those folks does not enhance USAPA's credibility.
 

cactusboy53

Veteran
May 9, 2007
2,649
7,407
I never agreed to NIC arbitration

That's unfortunate, since the ALPA merger policy does not seek your (or my) ratification or approval. I know you are upset and reacting, but I wouldn't hurt to read the ALPA section 45 and the AWA/AAA arbitration transcripts, and finally the actual Nicolau award (not just the numbr that you ended up with).

How much of our money (yes, I am member in good standing) are you willing to spend in a land grab that has been already settled (2, going on 3 x)? How much money are you willing to watch float away that you will NEVER be able to recover? The Kirby proposal +8% and other improvements would garner over $40,000 in wages, time off and other benefits.
 
E

EastUS

Guest
Well, for starters we were not in bankrupcy when the merger happened.

AWA had been shopping merger partners ala ATA ....

Project "zanzibar" or whatever worse case scenario would not have been needed if the West turned in the numbers they did following the merger ....

Perhaps when fuel spiked it could have dealt a terminal blow,...

So who knows what would have happened to AWA sans merger?

1) No one perishes in any tragic car crash....until the actual instant of impact. Up 'till that very harsh point in time, and even seconds before...everyone's just fine.

2) ATA?..that would have probably worked out really great, at least based upon ATA's current condition...?? None can say for certain though.

3) "if the West turned in the numbers they did following the merger ...." No additional comment required.

4) "Perhaps.." indeed.

5) I'd agree that the results for any path not taken are never 100% certain, although..the west is notably fond of asserting that it's utterly "certain" that US would have become extinct. Using that same projection of "certainty" towards the non-merged status of AWA can easily produce the same conclusion for a great many observers. Merely food for thought.

The above observations are not meant to open up any argument as to who (as if any) "saved" whomever, but to illustrate that such thought's essentially an irrational, futile and circular exercise

Within any context of unionism, at least that I can understand; Implications or assertions that some/any trade/class or craft members should ever be held as superior or more entitled/deserving than any others within that craft, based upon any supposed/whimsical "future" are inherently absurd. The whole "we saved you..so you owe us everything" was/is, well, equally nonsensical. It's long been my honest appraisal that such flawed thought's suitable only for rationalizing away questionable goals or behaviors at a personal or group level. Seriously; one might as well consult the nearest astrologer for any determination of seniority or other issues. That alpa "processes" pretty much do/did just exactly that's not the point :lol:

Regardless..here we all still are in this so-very-sorry soap operatic strife....and "as sands through the hour glass...so go the days of our skies"....

I hope all who had the chance for some real-life, quality time with friends and loved ones this holiday weekend took full advantage of the opportunity. :up: Life's too dang short, but sadly; we always can find time to "fight"....
 

skyflyr69

Senior
Dec 11, 2002
439
13
That's unfortunate, since the ALPA merger policy does not seek your (or my) ratification or approval. I know you are upset and reacting, but I wouldn't hurt to read the ALPA section 45 and the AWA/AAA arbitration transcripts, and finally the actual Nicolau award (not just the numbr that you ended up with).

How much of our money (yes, I am member in good standing) are you willing to spend in a land grab that has been already settled (2, going on 3 x)? How much money are you willing to watch float away that you will NEVER be able to recover? The Kirby proposal +8% and other improvements would garner over $40,000 in wages, time off and other benefits.

We'll take termination end date LOA 93, 70 million lump instead. The date is fast approaching TIC TIC TIC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.