US Pilots Labor Thread Aug 27-Sep 3 KEEP ON TOPIC

[hp_fa]

To say that Wake's interpretation of the law, was/is the only possible outcome would be to ignore the fact that on the highest court in the land, the court is divided on the issue of abortion and whether the mother or unborn child's rights has legal primacy under the constitution. Same document and wildly divergent views between judges on interpretation and how it applies.

I don't think you aimed that directly at me because I have repeatedly said that anytime anyone puts any contested before any other person (or panel) they lose control over their destiny and you never know how they will rule. What I have said is that I believe Judge Wake got it right and did not commit reversible error.

Good discussion though...

 

[nycbusdriver]

What do you HAVE now. Less then what we make.

Not me. I've made more, by boatloads, than any of you on the west throughout my entire 30 years here, and I still make more than anyone on the west.

And, I strongly suspect, I always will.

Point your sarcasm elsewhere.

 

[ableoneable]

I agree wholeheartedly.

But I question the sanity and/or motives of your west brethren who are chomping at the bit to get a vote on the Kirby proposal.

I question the sanity............

I question the motive, of course, for the obvious reason that the west is chomping at the bit to get the Nicolau into effect, and it will take a combined contract to do it. (Even Judge Sleep Wake agrees with that.) Just not gonna happen, though.

I agree and I think that many on the west do so as well.

The Kirby proposal would get a no vote from this west voter. Voters who stop reading when they get to the compensation section of a contract proposal are idiots. The Kirby proposal contains give backs that I am not interested in giving.

Regardless the outcome of the appeal, assuming USAir survives, I don't see a contract anywhere in the near to mid term.

 

[luvthe9]

Regardless the outcome of the appeal, assuming USAir survives, I don't see a contract anywhere in the near to mid term.

You might be right, although we could have one in a matters of months or less if EVERY pilot stuck together and ran the operation the way current situations dictate. :angry:

 

[Al Legheny]

I'm not sure I understand or agree with SSM&P and USAPA's tactics in filing a Stay request to the 9th Circuit. Let me list why:

1. USAPA, via Granneth in oral argument, admitted that negotiations were slow going and highly unlikely to be resolved anywhere near December;

2. Filing requests such as this, that is extremely likely to be denied, likely won't endear them to the panel that eventually is assigned to the case;

3. USAPA has cited monetary issues in both the trial ourt and the Court of Appeals, yet continues to file as much paper as possible in all courts, EXCEPT to do discovery in the damages phase in the trial court; and,

4. Why do you want to give the Court of Appeals any extra chances to dislike you when it is already clear from the trial court that it disliked you. All you are doing is providing evidence to the Court of Appeals that the observation of the trial court was based in fact.

Have at it...

I think it was a formality.

USAPA Update
August 28, 2009


Item One: This afternoon, USAPA’s attorneys filed a motion with the Ninth Circuit seeking to stay the district court’s injunction and all further proceedings in the district court pending resolution of our expedited appeal. The motion will shortly be added to our Legal Library.

As was discussed in last week’s Legal Update, the federal rules require that this motion first be made with the district court. The stay motion was made to the district court the same day we filed our notice of appeal, and as expected, Judge Wake denied that motion. Judge Wake issued his formal written denial of our motion to stay today, and our attorneys immediately filed a motion requesting the same relief from the Ninth Circuit.

Plaintiffs will have eight (8) days, under Ninth Circuit rules, to respond to USAPA’s motion unless that time is shortened by the Court. If our attorneys deem necessary, we will then have five (5) days following Plaintiffs’ response to file a reply. Motions to the Ninth Circuit are typically decided without oral argument.

 

[hp_fa]

Plaintiffs will have eight (8) days, under Ninth Circuit rules, to respond to USAPA’s motion unless that time is shortened by the Court. If our attorneys deem necessary, we will then have five (5) days following Plaintiffs’ response to file a reply. Motions to the Ninth Circuit are typically decided without oral argument.

I would imagine that this time the appelles will choose to oppose the appellant's motion.

 

[cleardirect]

I think it was a formality.

USAPA Update
August 28, 2009


Item One: This afternoon, USAPA’s attorneys filed a motion with the Ninth Circuit seeking to stay the district court’s injunction and all further proceedings in the district court pending resolution of our expedited appeal. The motion will shortly be added to our Legal Library.

As was discussed in last week’s Legal Update, the federal rules require that this motion first be made with the district court. The stay motion was made to the district court the same day we filed our notice of appeal, and as expected, Judge Wake denied that motion. Judge Wake issued his formal written denial of our motion to stay today, and our attorneys immediately filed a motion requesting the same relief from the Ninth Circuit.

Plaintiffs will have eight (8) days, under Ninth Circuit rules, to respond to USAPA’s motion unless that time is shortened by the Court. If our attorneys deem necessary, we will then have five (5) days following Plaintiffs’ response to file a reply. Motions to the Ninth Circuit are typically decided without oral argument.

Not really a formality. Just because usapa CAN file paperwork does not mean that they have to. As HP-FA said the contract will not be done before the appeal is heard. So there really is no need to file the stay. There is no harm by not filing. Other then show for the east pilots, a stay that will be denied is a waste of money and the courts time. Proving that uaspa/Seham are exactly what the judge has said.

If usapa is now complaining about the cost of litigation it is usapa's choice to file the stay not a requirement. So we go back to what is usapa really complaining about and is it legit?

 

[hp_fa]

Here is what I truly do not understand, at least for any legitimate reason. Why is USAPA, via SSM&P, throwing away credibility before the courts?

The actual statement by Judge Wake contained in the final and appealable Order in the trial court is so rare that I actually never previously saw it stated in that way before by a judge. That Order will be read by any and all appellate judges that ever see this case. So, even giving USAPA and SSM&P every benefit of the doubt regarding how Judge Wake perceived them in court, they go out and blow their credibility again, this time directly to the Ninth.

How so?

Without a stay, USAPA and its members will suffer irreparable harm because collective bargaining that has been ongoing for years is now effectively paralyzed.

Huh? What irreparable harm? Nicholas Granneth admitted in the oral argument that the pace of negotiations is slow and only a few negotiation sessions are scheduled between now and the end of the year. Additionally, the whole topic of pilot compensation hasn't yet even been opened. So where is any factual basis for irreparable harm?

Next sentence.

At the same time, ongoing litigation expenses associated with any further proceedings at the district court impose a significant hardship.

Where is there any proof? There is plenty of proof to the contrary because USAPA, via SSM&P, has filed every document and made every argument possible and then some. It is true that a party to a litigation has to fully argue its position in the trial court or forever waive that argument on appeal. However the record in the case, as argued by SSM&P, well exceeds what was required to merely preserve the record and that record will be available to the appellate court.

One last sentence to go...

Finally, the flying public’s interest (and the carrier’s) will be served by a stay and early resolution to this case.

How does the flying public have any care whatsoever whether the injunction is either in place or lifted? Most of the flying public, or the public-at-large, have no knowledge that there is an injunction in place so how can they have any interest in, or be served by, the staying of the injunction?

None of you need a law degree or any legal training to understand these particular statements or their context. These are simple statements that USAPA, through its counsel, claim are the factual basis for the motion to the Ninth Circuit, but none of them are true.

So the question still arises, why is USAPA, through counsel, throwing away any shred of credibility in front of the Court of Appeals after it did the very same thing in the trial court?

 

[cleardirect]

So the question still arises, why is USAPA, through counsel, throwing away any shred of credibility in front of the Court of Appeals after it did the very same thing in the trial court?

So Seham can pad his resume and bill by trying to go to the supreme court. It may be his last chance or last client.

 

[hp_fa]

The thing is that I simply don't understand why any attorney would toss away credibility in any court under any circumstances. I would feel the same way even if this wasn't USAPA because I don't understand any psychology that causes you to lose credibility before the court.

 

[electricjet98]

The thing is that I simply don't understand why any attorney would toss away credibility in any court under any circumstances.

Sehem continues to have credibility with USAPA because he is saying what they want to hear. It is USAPA that will pay for his retirement...not any court.

 

[luvthe9]

Sehem continues to have credibility with USAPA because he is saying what they want to hear. It is USAPA that will pay for his retirement...not any court.

Just as you west people will pay for the retirement of your attorney.

 

[Metroyet]

Sehem continues to have credibility with USAPA because he is saying what they want to hear. It is USAPA that will pay for his retirement...not any court.

Exactly. Seham had BETTER stuff his pockets with hard earned dues money as best he can as he, and his firm will likely be un-hireable after such a public, meteoric failure.

 

[nycbusdriver]

... his firm will likely be un-hireable after such a public, meteoric failure.

Or not.

Do you think Judge Wake can take away his Seeham's license and dissolve his legal partnership, too? Maybe he can cure cancer, save the environment and pay off the public debt while he's at it!

 

[Metroyet]

Or not.

Do you think Judge Wake can take away his Seeham's license and dissolve his legal partnership, too? Maybe he can cure cancer, save the environment and pay off the public debt while he's at it!

I'm not referring to The Honorable Judge Wake. I'm just highlighting the fact that most potential clients that Seham may encounter in the future will most likely perform some due diligence on Sehams record...something that the usapa founders should have tried to do without emotion. If they had, perhaps thousands of pilot families wouldn'thave missed out on hundreds of millions of dollars in contract gains just so a minority of disenchanted east co-pilots could attempt to gain something that they couldn't negotiate.

That's all i'm saying...