US Pilots' Labor Thread 6/9-6/16--PLEASE OBSERVE THE RULES

[Phoenix]

I don't think that I qualify. Sorry. 🙂

Its nice how that works out. 🙂

 

[Piedmont1984]

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell No!

:unsure:
:blink:

 

[hp_fa]

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell No!

Faber, Faber!! Link

 

[cleardirect]

:unsure:
:blink:

Bluto, Animal House.

You looked confused.

 

[cactusboy53]

They have to be unanimous, in order to render a verdict, at least in the trials I've been juror on. Perhaps it is possible a jury could be divided, but, where I served that would be grounds for re-trial.

I would want out of that verdict anyway if jurors are "compensated" like the jurors where I served, most small companies can't/won't compensate and the state/city barely pays mileage, the stipend barely covering lunch.

BTW, it seems I remember in each case, being cautioned about what we say after the trial. Perhaps PHX is different. Heck, they got that fruit-cake for a sheriff so who knows.

Snark;
So what you are saying is that every jury decision is tainted by the disinterest & amount of money (or the lack thereof) that they get from the obligation, and that no juror is interested in actually seeking true justice??

That really doesn't explain how this jury seemed rapt in the testimony, and seeking clarification on various points of testimony (including the pronunciation of Theur's name ).

WOW. The hubris remains at an all time high.

 

[traderjake]

Are you one of those who toss in the towel at the opening bell? Whose spine turns to jello at the whisper of "concessions"? .

Some people confuse courage with being stupid.

I know you can't see it yet but the overwhelming probability is that the courts are going to enforce the arbitration award.

 

[hp_fa]

BTW, it seems I remember in each case, being cautioned about what we say after the trial. Perhaps PHX is different. Heck, they got that fruit-cake for a sheriff so who knows.

Once the jurors are released from the admonishment they are free to do as they see fit as far as discussing or not discussing the case with anyone they so choose.

 

[ussnark]

So what you are saying is that every jury decision is tainted by the disinterest & amount of money (or the lack thereof) that they get from the obligation, and that no juror is interested in actually seeking true justice??

No. But it helps to understand if you have served at all. Perhaps a few more years will help you.

The cases I have served (all but one were criminal) the jurors must come out in agreement or it was considered a hung jury so just saying (they all nodded agreement) really means nothing.

 

[ussnark]

Once the jurors are released from the admonishment they are free to do as they see fit as far as discussing or not discussing the case with anyone they so choose.

That is correct. However, each time on the criminal cases, we were told to think about what we said, publicly.

 

[ussnark]

Some people confuse courage with being stupid.

We got rid of those people with the CBA change. EDITED BY MODERATOR

 

[BoeingBoy]

The cases I have served (all but one were criminal) the jurors must come out in agreement or it was considered a hung jury so just saying (they all nodded agreement) really means nothing.

If you'd read the transcript, you'd find that the jury was polled after the verdict was read by the foreperson. They were individually asked if they agreed with the verdict and each stated that they did. Don't know where you got the "nodded agreement"...

Judge: Will the foreperson please tell us whether the jury has unanimously reached a verdict.

Jury Foreperson: We have, Your Honor.

Court Deputy reads verdict

Judge: All right. Will the clerk please poll the jury.

Court Deputy: Juror Number 1, is this your true and correct verdict?

Juror Number 1: Yes, it is.

Repeat for each juror...

Jim

 

[Poug Darker]

Ok, juror, here's the choice: agree with the majority, go home/back to work. No more being stuck in these windowless rooms getting $15/day applying all available brain power to something you really could care less about and does not affect your life at all.
Been there, done that - I will agree that one of the prime considerations for the jury is to 'be done with it' and go home.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Ok, juror, here's the choice: agree with the majority, go home/back to work. No more being stuck in these windowless rooms getting $15/day applying all available brain power to something you really could care less about and does not affect your life at all.
Been there, done that - I will agree that one of the prime considerations for the jury is to 'be done with it' and go home.

Bingo!

It takes real conscience to hold out in the minority on a jury and forcing a hung jury. Most people would rather go with the flow, get it over with and go home.

Having a contract that requires the employer to pay you regular salary while on jury duty would go a long way toward negating this problem. Me? I like jury duty. I get to go home every night and still collect my regular paycheck. If I truly believed I was right, I would stay forever in the minority. If the rest want to go home, they can learn to agree with me.

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

The fact is it doesn't really matter why the jury found for the plaintiffs....heck, if I didn't know anything about this and read the jury instructions based on Wakes "pre-decided guilt"
I would find for the plaintiffs too...

None of that matters. What does matter, I suppose, is that the issue of damages (improper furloughs) has no legs under the TA for the same reason the company was held harmless for said furloughs in the initial complaint.

The pie-in-the-sky grab over lost wages due to no Nic under seperate ops will go nowhere.

I had a guy suggest that Wake may dictate some timeline by which USAPA must execute a contract containing the Nic or face stiff fines for exceeding the timeline....too funny: now Wake can set the parameters for genuine contract talks between a union and the company and issue a drop-dead date to sign under the RLA?

Next I'll hear he leaps tall buildings in a single-bound.

 

[nic4us]

Ok, juror, here's the choice: agree with the majority, go home/back to work. No more being stuck in these windowless rooms getting $15/day applying all available brain power to something you really could care less about and does not affect your life at all.
Been there, done that - I will agree that one of the prime considerations for the jury is to 'be done with it' and go home.

The options you post support a reasonable enough arguement, however, in this case it only took 2 hours to deliberate, and it was not even a Friday afternoon. There were no holdouts, no inproper jury instructions, USAPA was/is guilty and that was why the verdict was unanimous, quick, and proper.