2014 Pilot Discussion

[luvthe9]

 
He's a punk wanna be thug,.

As opposed to your other boyfriend who threatened the President of the United States on Facebook, T Bone, hey your in with a good group!! We see you and Munn are back from your date, let me guess sitting on the couch together making up half truths.

 

[Phoenix]

The State of the Union on an ISL: June 6, 2014

The May 31st the APA DCA Rep Update said "The APA has subsequently met with USAPA to discuss the protocols. There are attorneys and advisors present. They are trying their best to protect your (and USAPA pilots’) interests. They are being very careful. This slows the process. We believe we’ll have an agreement soon. The NMB could rule on our application for single carrier status within weeks or a couple of months." 

In its June 6th BPR Special Meeting Recap USAPA said, "APA has indicated that it does not expect to present a counter proposal on the proposed protocol agreement or other matters (union transition agreement and settlement agreement) that were sent to APA on April 29 until after the Court has ruled on the pending motions in the McCaskill-Bond Injunction action. As a result, there have been no negotiations among the parties concerning those proposals."

USAPA continued, "Judge Howell, who is the Judge in the McCaskill Bond Injunction action, may simply issue a decision on the motions or may decide to hold oral argument on the motions. If there is oral argument, we expect there to be a week to ten days’ notice before they are scheduled. There is no fixed deadline for Judge Howell to decide the motions but she is generally prompt in deciding matters before her."

Chip's comments: Unfortunately as I predicted APA has elected to ignore USAPA's new draft PA, UMTA, GA, and lawsuit settlement offer most likely because USAPA will not agree to a 3-way ISL arbitration as desired by APA and AAG. According to USAPA "there have been no negotiations among the parties concerning those proposals;" however, on May 20th (17 days ago) USAPA said, "As previously noted, proposals approved by the BPR (the proposed Protocol Agreement, proposed Union Merger Transition Agreement, and proposed Global Settlement Agreement) were passed to APA on April 29. APA has not yet responded, but the Merger Committee expects a counter proposal soon, possibly by the end of this week."

To me "no negotiations" means none, nada, zero, or zip negotiations between USAPA's 6-person full FPL MC (ALPA only had 3 pilots on everyone of their US Airways mergers and USAPA has twice the amount of full FPL pilots on their MC) and their APA counterparts. 

What happened to USAPA's prediction? Did we just witness USAPA's use of demagoguery, again? Is anybody else tired of witnessing the same actions over-and-over again and expecting a different result?

I don't think anybody should be surprised by APA's actions (ignoring USAPA, filing a counter lawsuit against USAPA, and APA's Reply motions) since we just learned through APA attorney Wesley Kennedy's Declaration that LCC, AMR, and APA have told USAPA since before the MOU was finalized that following SCC APA would legally represent all of us per the NMB, RLA, MOU, & MTA. However, without Kennedy's testimony under oath the pilots would not have known the SCC problem existed for the US Airways pilots because USAPA hid this information from the rank-and-file. 

It appears that USAPA continues to refuse to agree to management and APA's demand for a 3-way M-B ISL arbitration, if held, USAPA continues to commit Judicial Estoppel, and USAPA is waiting for either Judge Howell or the NMB through SCC to force a 3-way M-B arbitration on the US Airways' pilots. Why? Most likely as in the past because the union's hardliners do not want to accept responsibility and does not have the fortitude to make an unpopular decision that would upset the hard core DOH supporters.

At least US Airways' pilots now know who will make USAPA's next major SLI decision for the pilots: either a federal judge in the M-B lawsuit Injunction action, an arbitrator for MTA #5, or the NMB with a SCC order. How has this strategy of fighting to fight by committing a Judical Estoppel violation that has led to no agreements and then letting a third-party decide the US Airways pilots fate worked in the past? 

 
 
Regardless, there are only two ways to an SLI... 1) arbitration pursuant to MB compelled by the court, or 2) a negotiated agreement between APA and USAPA pursuant to MB....   everything else is merely noise that increases the delay.
 
..and frankly I don't care which path APA chooses to go or how long it takes.

 

[luvthe9]

Regardless, there are only two ways to an SLI... 1) arbitration pursuant to MB compelled by the court, or 2) a negotiated agreement between APA and USAPA pursuant to MB....   everything else is merely noise that increases the delay.
 
..and frankly I don't care which path APA chooses to go or how long it takes.

And that's the bottom line!!! Your right, the longer the better for both sides.

 

[EastUS1]

Regardless, there are only two ways to an SLI... 1) arbitration pursuant to MB compelled by the court, or 2) a negotiated agreement between APA and USAPA pursuant to MB....   everything else is merely noise that increases the delay.
 
..and frankly I don't care which path APA chooses to go or how long it takes.

 
I'd think the only people at all worried about how much time this whole mess takes are PHX folks, and somehow, I  just don't see the world turning any differently just to suit their wishes.

 

[Phoenix]

 
I'd think the only people at all worried about how much time this whole mess takes are PHX folks, and somehow;i  just don't see the world turning any differently just to suit their wishes.

 
I'm the only Phoenix that doesn't care.   😛

 

[EastUS1]

Both of them are going to eat crow after this is all over.

 
Would "you'se" happen to have yet another "T-minus" countdown clock for any of this, or have they all been worn out already? 😉

 

[traderjake]

Agenda Item - Merger Committee Update
 
APA has indicated that it does not expect to present a counter proposal on the proposed protocol agreement or other matters (union transition agreement and settlement agreement) that were sent to APA on April 29 until after the Court has ruled on the pending motions in the McCaskill-Bond Injunction action. As a result, there have been no negotiations among the parties concerning those proposals.
 
"In particular, the {Merger} Committee has been canvassing recent decisions and the records in the Delta-Northwest proceeding and the United-Continental proceeding. They are examining the testimony of the experts in those cases and the exhibits presented, and discussing the evidence and approaches in these cases, and others, with our experts." --
USAPA.
 
 
What?
 
Examining and discussing the exhibits and approaches of the USAir-Piedmont preceedings is not their first priority?  

 

[USA320Pilot]

Wesley Kennedy's Declaration proved that APA has not "hood winked" us and has been up front and honest since the beginning of this regarding their intent to have a 3-way arbitration process since MOU negotations before the merger was executed. Time and time again USAPA misleads us, provides misinformation, and uses demagoguery to influence the pilots as if we are dumb sheep following the heard.

For the past 1.5 years during MOU negotiations and then through failed PA discussions APA and AAG have always maintained they will only support a 3-way ISL arbitration. USAPA's response? The West pilots cannot have their own seat at the M-B table because only the bargaining agent can, which is right. And, that's the right argument based on the RLA as correctly ruled on by Judge Silver. However, USAPA wants to change this argument as predicted by Judge Silver (actually not as predicted by Silver, but she must have been a prophet because that is exactly what was going on behind closed doors) when she wrote, "The court has no doubt that-as is USAPA's consistent practice-USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view of seniority."

And, maybe that's been the strategy by some in USAPA's WWHQ's all along. Szymanski had to know he was committing Judicial Estoppel and that is likely why he refused to testify in the Addington II DFR trial. Before the trial he and Wilder were arguing with Kennedy for USAPA to have a seat at the M-B table post SCC. Then Szymanski switched his argument in Judge Silver's courtroom when he took a position against US Airways' Summary Judgment stating the West could not have seat at the M-B table because only the bargaining agent is permitted to do so per the RLA.

Maybe Szymanski knew what he was doing all long and he knows his actions would likely result in a M-B lawsuit case dismissal because of his Judical Estoppel violation. After all, Szymanski knows the law full well in regard to inconsistent positions in two different cases.

Maybe certain members of USAPA and the pilots have been duped all along, but by the unions advisors and certain leaders.

At least we now know why the pilots have an industry leading 2.45% dues rate, why USAPA needs need 6 versus 3 MC Reps (ALPA only uses 3 Reps) on FPL vacation, and labor attorneys who sit on USAPA's doorsteps begging to represent USAPA. FPL and billable hours are flourishing on Woodlawn Avenue.

In summary, APA is no longer talking to USAPA and blew off the the US Airways pilots union's new draft PA, UMTA, GA, and lawsuit settlement offer. USAPA has been become irrelevant in the eyses of APA and AAG who act as strategic partners. The fight to fight is over and now we can sit back, buy another box of popcorn, and wait for Judge Howell and the NMB to rule. I found an interesting comment on another message board when a poster said, "In this merger USAPA has become the freak show, while everyone else is watching the main event. 'There is a sucker born every minute.' PT. Barnum and USAPA." 

It's just funny watching the same people run the union by playing chess with checkers. 

In the end I believe it is probable we will have a 3-way M-B ISL arbitration with a West MC that will be able to introduce the Nicolau Award at M-B, USAPA will be able to argue against the Nicolau Award at M-B, and APA will be able to argue their position at M-B.
 
USAPA = Pyrrhic Victory. 

 

[USA320Pilot]

 
 
Regardless, there are only two ways to an SLI... 1) arbitration pursuant to MB compelled by the court, or 2) a negotiated agreement between APA and USAPA pursuant to MB....   everything else is merely noise that increases the delay.
 
..and frankly I don't care which path APA chooses to go or how long it takes.

 
Disagree. And, this statement does not understand the psychology of USAPA's union hardliners.
 
The hardliners cannot make a decision that requires responsibility or accountability because of their use of demagoguery. Instead the Hardliners delay taking an action, never reach an agreement, and wait for the legal process to impose a resolution.
In this case, if the past equals the future, USAPA will wait for the NMB to order SCC and for the M-B lawsuit to be dismissed.
 
Then the Hardliners can point the finger at the NMB and Judge Howell.
 
Then once these two events occur APA will become the pilot's union and appoint three MCs for the likely M-B arbitration.   

 

[crazystnic]

Why is it always Union Hardliners Chip?  Why can't you stand up for yourself at least once in your 30 year career?
 
I'm glad your ok with me going behind D Odell... I've been here since 89 and have 16.5 years of Longevity.
 
I really don't care that APA is not responding to our proposal.
 
Let's see how it all turns out in the end.  Time is on our side.  Maybe not for you.

 

[nevergiveup]

 
Disagree. And, this statement does not understand the psychology of USAPA's union hardliners.
 
The hardliners cannot make a decision that requires responsibility or accountability because of their use of demagoguery. Instead the Hardliners delay taking an action, never reach an agreement, and wait for the legal process to impose a resolution.
In this case, if the past equals the future, USAPA will wait for the NMB to order SCC and for the M-B lawsuit to be dismissed.
 
Then the Hardliners can point the finger at the NMB and Judge Howell.
 
Then once these two events occur APA will become the pilot's union and appoint three MCs for the likely M-B arbitration.   

I hope this drags on for years. Do you want the same?

 

[Phoenix]

 
Disagree. And, this statement does not understand the psychology of USAPA's union hardliners.
 
The hardliners cannot make a decision that requires responsibility or accountability because of their use of demagoguery. Instead the Hardliners delay taking an action, never reach an agreement, and wait for the legal process to impose a resolution.
In this case, if the past equals the future, USAPA will wait for the NMB to order SCC and for the M-B lawsuit to be dismissed.
 
Then the Hardliners can point the finger at the NMB and Judge Howell.
 
Then once these two events occur APA will become the pilot's union and appoint three MCs for the likely M-B arbitration.   

 
Arbitration cannot commence without 1) the consent of all participants, or in the alternative 2) a court order mandating the participants and the question of arbitration... i.e. an agreement between APA and USAPA, or a court order pursuant to MB.   APA gets to pick one or the other.  
 
Even if APA is granted SCS it does not receive authority to compel arbitration among unwilling participants (your implicit assumption notwithstanding)...  the APA would need the court to compel participation (which is exactly what USAPA is suing for )... 
 
The participants of MB arbitration are established via the MB Statute itself, not a union.   The participants to MB arbitration are not established by whim, and certainly not unilaterally by the largest union in a merger... at least that is effectively the issue before the court, and the court will have to resolve it to enforce the statute, regardless of whatever or whenever the NMB decides about SCS.  

 

[mrbreeze]

The State of the Union on an ISL: June 6, 2014

The May 31st the APA DCA Rep Update said "The APA has subsequently met with USAPA to discuss the protocols. There are attorneys and advisors present. They are trying their best to protect your (and USAPA pilots’) interests. They are being very careful. This slows the process. We believe we’ll have an agreement soon. The NMB could rule on our application for single carrier status within weeks or a couple of months." 

In its June 6th BPR Special Meeting Recap USAPA said, "APA has indicated that it does not expect to present a counter proposal on the proposed protocol agreement or other matters (union transition agreement and settlement agreement) that were sent to APA on April 29 until after the Court has ruled on the pending motions in the McCaskill-Bond Injunction action. As a result, there have been no negotiations among the parties concerning those proposals."

USAPA continued, "Judge Howell, who is the Judge in the McCaskill Bond Injunction action, may simply issue a decision on the motions or may decide to hold oral argument on the motions. If there is oral argument, we expect there to be a week to ten days’ notice before they are scheduled. There is no fixed deadline for Judge Howell to decide the motions but she is generally prompt in deciding matters before her."

Chip's comments: 

This is where I quit reading, knowing the warped BS that was on the way.
breeze

 

[EastUS1]

It's just funny watching the same people run the union by playing chess with checkers. 

In the end I believe it is probable .....

 
Just "probable"? Wasn't the United merger a "done deal"? How well did that work out, within the strange little realm of your cracked crystal ball? Speaking of "playing chess with checkers"....

 

[traderjake]

 
Arbitration cannot commence without 1) the consent of all participants, or in the alternative 2) a court order mandating the participants and the question of arbitration... i.e. an agreement between APA and USAPA, or a court order pursuant to MB.   APA gets to pick one or the other.

 
Is the language in the MOU an agreement to consent to the MB process if negotiations fail?