What was true years ago is true now. A leopard can't change it's spots.
The transcripts show a pattern of evasive behavior of USAPA VP, Stephen Bradford.
Don Addington, et al. v. US Airline Pilots Association, et al.
Stephen Bradford March 19, 2009
A. There was a pilot who formed a website
that was called AAAPilots4fairness.com and people
signed up and used that website and out of that grew
a committee.
Q. What period of time are you talking about
here?
A. June, July.
Q. Of '07?
A. Yes.
Q. And the committee -- were you a member of
the committee?
A. No. I mean, I -- yes, I guess we called
it a committee and it related to that board because
that's where the board --
Q. Well --
A. That was the first web board that existed
that we could congregate on.
USAPAWATCH saw it as well...
USAPA has at various stages misstated law, facts, and procedural history with frequent recourse to the 'contradiction or confusion...produced by a medley of judicial phrases severed from their environment. – The Honorable Judge Neil V. Wake[/size]
The following text reveals the context of the legal opinion from respected labor attorney Chris Katzenbach of Katzenbach and Khitikan. Mr. Katzenbach’s firm was interviewed in May 2007 in the early stages of Mr. Bradford’s expedition to form a new organization, an organization with the singular goal of destroying the careers of the former America West pilots. Although the letter was marked confidential, in the fanaticism to gain support of the East pilots, this material was published on a public Web site thus piercing the normally ironclad veil of attorney/client privilege. As a result of this all too common recklessness and oversight within USAPA’s founding leadership, this letter was admitted into evidence and became an important component of the Addington trial and subsequent verdict. In the discussion, Mr. Katzenbach warned Mr. Bradford by stating,
...the language you use in setting up your new union and how you go about talking and writing about your solutions to this award can be used against you. You need to stress [t]he positives of the new union and not dwell on the award. Don't give the other side a large body of evidence that the sole reason for the new union is to abrogate an arbitration, the Nicolau award, that in the opinions of most judges, should be allowed to stand due to no gross negligence or fraud
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh, the irony
The PHL domicile meeting was held on June 17, 2014 in the PHL Airport Marriott. This meeting location was selected in order to promote a more convenient location so more pilots could attend. Unfortunately, pilot participation was very disappointing, even though the meeting was widely publicized.
The meeting itself was very informative and included many guest speakers who took the time to keep our pilots informed and up to speed on critical issues. Please make an effort to attend future meetings in order to remain as up to date as possible on all of the issues that affect your careers.
3% Issue
Grievance Committee member John Karras gave an update on the rationale behind the dismissal of our court case in Western Pennsylvania, which sought to vacate the Arbitration Award denying annual 3% raises to the pilots commencing on May 1, 2010. It should be noted that your PHL reps have always believed this was a very difficult case and we considered it a long shot at best. It is important to understand, in the absence of fraud and a few other rare situations, Federal Courts will allow an Arbitrator’s award to stand as binding on the parties even if an arbitrator “just got it wrong.”
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh, the irony
