2014 Pilot Discussion

[EastUS1]

america west pilots eric auxier and tony anger are scabs IMHO.
 
Watch the credits at the end of the video.  I love auxier's (ie; hypocrite scab capn aux) quote about phx pilots update recommending their pilots to "keep their nose clean" during company negotiations.  capn aux is excited about the injunction against all US Airways pilots.
 
In the video capn aux did not like USAPA lanyards, but 675 dollar ties are ok in his integrity list.
 
Never forget.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlzpMjT58WY&index=7&list=PL5DCDEE4D2ADA2659

 
Whew!...Umm....Wow! See listings under: You just can't/couldn't EVER even BEGIN to make this stuff up folks...An "heroically" T-shirted, perpetual adolescent wildly cheering on "the company" while proudly bragging that the west "urged pilots to keep their noses clean" and even offering amazingly childish fantasies about "spent cartridges on the battlefield" pretty much sums up the PHX/Fantasyland "spartan" clan in "nut"-shell. One must reasonably imagine that the poor lad had to keep the frantic presentation brief so's to more quickly dash off-camera to suck on a company/management-emblazoned pacifier.

 

[EastUS1]

I'm LMAO because you thought the APA was going to play in UCRAPA's hand. After reading the APA's briefs, it's pretty clear USAPs are irrelevant.

 
Whatever best affords you sweet dreams and happy fantasies is perfectly fine, but if you wish to seriously dicuss relevance, perhaps you should first begin by examining the last several years of permanent bid results.

 

[end_of_alpa]

 
 
I'd say go for it. USAPA LLC is no longer being funded, a large portion of the funds are going to be tied up until the dispute is over. The USAPA LLC insurance policy will have a premium to be paid. When I read Claxon's posts, which are fantasy rather than fact based about Ferguson not being able to show his face in the crew room is comical. The reality is that Leonidas has support has been here from the days of ALPA to the APA. USAPA has come and gone. There has been an increase in support and funding to see this through. The West legal team is committed as well, despite the misinformation to the contrary.
 
Here's a reality check from the Phoenix crew room:
 
I read all of the briefs, starting with USAPA's. I figured I had to or I never would have finished it. While the APA's is good, Freund's brief is amazing. Peppered with just enough USAPA stench over the past nine years to give the Board the full flavor of what they have been up to. I'm sure they already knew the story though.

Nice job guys. And that is why funding AOL is 1000% worth every dollar.
 
The "officers" of usapa are no doubt sweating at this letter. Their personal "fortunes" are at stake. They have no protection once that iron umbrella known as the RLA was removed when they were decertified.
 
I'll chip in some more $$$ to sue them personally, especially that lying chicken sh$t Bradford.
 
Count me in!
 
Going after the officer's personal wealth? Hell yes.
 
Good Job, Gentlemen, keep on them!
 
If I were one of the officers, I can guarantee you I would not be sleeping well after reading that demand letter from Marty.
 
Exactly, the demand letter has teeth. There is plenty of case law out there regarding this type of situation; funds collected by an organization for a certain purpose and then used for an entirely different one without consent.
 
An arrogant East pilot from another forum wrote of our money, "If you don't want your money depleted, stop triggering litigation which depletes your money."Thats like telling an assault victim to stop fighting back because the beating will end sooner if you give up. That's not happening.
 

Yep.  They're sweating.  They're not sleeping well.  The "Harper" letter has "teeth".  They're arrogant and the PAB are going to see how badly USAPA has treated them and will give AOL the keys to the kingdom!
 
Right!

 

[Pi brat]

Don't be laughing too soon. When have seen the power of the sternly written letter before. Just look at how much they achieved when ALPA was here...

 

[EastCheats]

I am quoting endofalpa's post above. 
 
USAPA obviously knew that merging with an airline of American Airline Pilots accustomed to showing up at a pilot merger with the top of their list and a stapler (IE:Air Cal, Reno and TWA) was going to be challenging. 
 
Frankly sir, you are an ill informed ass paying way too much money for a tie.  You did not  leap frog original US Airways pilots 17 years your senior, because East pilots were not bent over to allow such leap.
 
You are on your island in PHX for at least 6 years, not because you are a victim, it was due to your ignorance and greed.
 
Pay homage to fergie if you wish, it enhances the payback memories.
 
"end_of_alpa
Posted Today, 06:32 AM


Veteran




 
THE SMOKING GUN!!!


 
The parties extended the deadline for agreeing upon a Protocol Agreement through February 9, 2014. US Airways/American and APA then took the position that once APA became the certified bargaining representative, it could unilaterally establish a West Merger Committee and give it the right to participate in the SLI process. US Airways/American also claimed that once APA became the bargaining representative they would have the right to change any part of the Protocol Agreement without the consent of USAPA or the USAPA Merger Committee. The USAPA Merger Committee refused to agree, and the parties were at impasse."[/size]
 
The APA is as bad or even WORST than the company for trying to "backstab" the ALREADY agreed to Protocol Agreement between USAPA/APA/USAirways/American. "[/size]

Greed huh? It's your side that had a hissy fit after arbitration. In addition, you can't take responsibility for your own mistakes so you look for a scapegoat. You think your smarter than everyone else, arbitrators, the APA etc. What are you going to do if the next arbitration doesn't go your way? Throw the APA out? Throw a tantrum, burn the place down? I think you enjoy being miserable. You're nothing more than a brat who is no longer getting attention.

You have nothing in common with Eric Ferguson, you have more in common with a rioter in Ferguson, Missouri who has a problem with the system. That's because you are a criminally minded idiot.

 

[luvthe9]

Four or five months, Apr 15th 2:00 am I think we finally get rid of that dreadful cactus call sign.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Greed huh? It's your side that had a hissy fit after arbitration. In addition, you can't take responsibility for your own mistakes so you look for a scapegoat. You think your smarter than everyone else, arbitrators, the APA etc. What are you going to do if the next arbitration doesn't go your way? Throw the APA out? Throw a tantrum, burn the place down? I think you enjoy being miserable. You're nothing more than a brat who is no longer getting attention.

You have nothing in common with Eric Ferguson, you have more in common with a rioter in Ferguson, Missouri who has a problem with the system. That's because you are a criminally minded idiot.

I'm LOOKING FORWARD to next months award when the PAB says NO to you and yours.  Hissy fit?  USAPA HAS A PLACE in the SLI arbitration.  YOU WON'T!  
 
Your right, I have NOTHING IN COMMON with a pilot whose continuing interest is to drive a HUGE wedge between you and the rest of the pilot community.  
 
If you think I'm a criminal for denying you and yours your rightful place in the universe then I FEEL HONORED.
 
Go pound sand.

 

[fatherabraham]

Deleted

 

[end_of_alpa]

I'm LMAO because you thought the APA was going to play in UCRAPA's hand. After reading the APA's briefs, it's pretty clear USAPs are irrelevant.

 
You MAY wish to pass this brief written by the SLI arbitrator Ira Jaffe to Freuind and Hopper.  They may learn something.
 
[SIZE=11pt]"The role of the arbitrator in resolving statutory disputes differs in significant ways from that in contract disputes. In the latter case, the arbitrator has responsibility for enforcing the terms of the parties' private bargain and is the creature of the collective bargaining pro- cess. However, the arbitrator who is required, either by agreement of the parties or by external mandate, to resolve a question of public law violation assumes additional decisional and ethical obligations. These disputes may require the arbitrator to go beyond the traditional limits of the collective bargaining process. Although labor arbitrators remain sympathetic to the goals of minimizing disruption in the work place and protecting the collective bargaining process to a greater degree than judges or administrative agencies, these sympathies have clear limits and cannot compromise the obligation to decide statutory issues fairly and in a manner consistent with applicable legal precedent.[/SIZE]
 
 
[SIZE=11pt]Arbitrators who decide statutory cases preside over processes more complex and more legally oriented than labor arbitrations involving pure contract disputes. In some statutory arbitrations the greater degree of legal formalism results from statutory mandate. In other cases increased formalism is due to the actions both of the parties and of arbitrators, who believe that such formalism enhances the fairness and finality of the process and makes more manageable the development of the evidentiary record and the decisionmaking process. [/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=11pt]With the delays in court dockets ever more severe, with litigation costs spiraling out of control, and with the resolution of many em- ployment disputes requiring ever greater specialized legal expertise, many more statutory employment issues will be arbitrated in both the [/SIZE]union and non-union sectors. The parties may establish innovative statutory grievance and arbitration procedures, independent of the traditional collective bargaining models, with different hearing procedures, greater individual employee involvement, and potentially different arbitrators. This will result in better handling of those complex cases in a more formalistic process without losing the speed and informality needed for prompt resolution of contractually-based workplace disputes.
 
[SIZE=11pt]The truly difficult question is not whether the arbitrator needs to [/SIZE]assume a more legalistic, independent, and activist role, but to what degree this is appropriate. The resolution of these question depends upon a variety of factors including, but not limited to, the personal style of the arbitrator, the degree to which the advocates for the parties have competently presented the relevant factual and legal materials, external directives in the case law, internal directives of the agreement to arbitrate, and the nature of the particular factual and legal items in dispute. "  Ira Jaffe, Arbitrator US Airways-American SLI December 9, 2015.



 
http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1165&context=hlelj

 

[end_of_alpa]

Four or five months, Apr 15th 2:00 am I think we finally get rid of that dreadful cactus call sign.

Hopefully the "pricks" that go with it.

 

[nevergiveup]

Greed huh? It's your side that had a hissy fit after arbitration. In addition, you can't take responsibility for your own mistakes so you look for a scapegoat. You think your smarter than everyone else, arbitrators, the APA etc. What are you going to do if the next arbitration doesn't go your way? Throw the APA out? Throw a tantrum, burn the place down? I think you enjoy being miserable. You're nothing more than a brat who is no longer getting attention.

You have nothing in common with Eric Ferguson, you have more in common with a rioter in Ferguson, Missouri who has a problem with the system. That's because you are a criminally minded idiot.

Better read the fine print next time!

 

[Pi brat]

Greed huh? It's your side that had a hissy fit after arbitration. In addition, you can't take responsibility for your own mistakes so you look for a scapegoat. You
You have nothing in common with Eric Ferguson, you have more in common with a rioter in Ferguson, Missouri who has a problem with the system. That's because you are a criminally minded idiot.

That's amazing! I thought the same thing about some west pilots and Ferguson looters. "Burn it down!"

 

[snapthis]

 
THE SMOKING GUN!!!
 
 



"Once the Court issued its decision on January 10, 2014, US Airways/American and APA agreed that the “West Merger Committee” was not entitled to participate.
 
The parties extended the deadline for agreeing upon a Protocol Agreement through February 9, 2014. US Airways/American and APA then took the position that once APA became the certified bargaining representative, it could unilaterally establish a West Merger Committee and give it the right to participate in the SLI process. US Airways/American also claimed that once APA became the bargaining representative they would have the right to change any part of the Protocol Agreement without the consent of USAPA or the USAPA Merger Committee. The USAPA Merger Committee refused to agree, and the parties were at impasse."
 
The APA is as bad or even WORST than the company for trying to "backstab" the ALREADY agreed to Protocol Agreement between USAPA/APA/USAirways/American.  
 
Marty can try (he will not win) to get money from USAPA but the newly found pay raise the Pilots at AWA have gotten will continue to fund AOL to attack ANYTHING APA does for years to come.  USAPA will operate in perpetuity to thwart those efforts and this three way menage-a-trois will keep circling to effect any efforts to get a contract settled in the next negotiations.
 
The new hire Captains coming on line now will ensure the proper demise of the APA then.



 

 
I think the APA should take note of your wish for the demise of the APA. Are you going to take those funds which are in dispute and have another "conversation with an attorney" to get out future agreements which involve the APA?
 
Here's the THE SMOKING GUN!!!   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.
 
 
 
 

A Conversation with an Attorney​

KEEP THIS INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL​

On Saturday, June 9th in San Francisco I had a conversation regarding our case with Chris Katzenbach of Katzenbach and Khitikan, a labor law firm.

Katzenbach and Khitikan have done some NMB work primarily with the American Eagle pilots group and they helpd them set up a 501C3 non-profit format to hold the Eagle Pilots independent union which is involved in an organizing campaign to oust ALPA from that property.

In commenting on our case he said that as an outsider he really had to hand it to the opposing counsel in the final brief for the America West Pilots. He understands, in some respects, the issues involving airline seniority. He said however that to an outsider the America West brief was very convincing and easy to follow. This doesn't make it right or more fair, it's just an easier to follow and better presentation to follow than the Katz presentation. The America West brief, appears a least on the surface, to be more in line with the stated new ALPA merger policy. It ignores past president but if you only have the current policy as a point of reference then their argument seems more in tune with it.

Chris Katzenbach feels that a direct assault on this award in the courts is a looser. The courts don't want to be educated on the minutia of this case or any other complicated private matter. The courts only concern is if there is fraud or bribery or some other gross misconduct in the conduct of this arbitration. If pressed they would take a case like that but he feels it to be a looser. It would also probably require a substantial down payment up front to pursue. By the way their fees are very reasonable, $275.00 per billable hour.

I next specifically asked him about the formation of a new bargaining agent as an avenue of advance to get around this award. He says that it is entirely possible. The key the courts look for is not the private squabbles, procedures and methodologies between unions and their nationals, the facts of the collective bargaining agreement. The CBA is the defining argument in a case to the courts. The Railway Labor Act /National Mediation Board procedure and policy above all governs.

"Could the America West pilots sue us" I asked, "if we pursue this course of action." "Yes", he said however Duty of Fair representation suits are losers, Katzenbach and Khitikan sued ALPA for the American Eagle Pilots over their current contract which among other things had a 20 year no strike clause. The contract was a negotiating committee cram down to keep from having the Eagle flying farmed out and allowing for the American equivalent version of "jets for jobs" and "flow through." Does this sound familiar?? As a result of this contract the Eagle pilots are trying to get out of ALPA.

Chris said the contract was truly piece of "####" but because it was negotiated by the duly elected negotiating committee it would stand in court. They lost big-time and that's that. So to answer the question, yes you can be sued but they must prove fraud or other really gross violations of law to have the suit stand up. However, he cautioned, 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 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.

In a ruling by the NLRB, not the NMB, in 1954, stated: Seniority status in mergers must be resolved between the the employer and the union not by the union unilaterally. 107 NLRB 837;225F.2nd.343. That is to say seniority lives in the collective bargaining agreement not inside the unions. It will cost some more money to find if there is an equivalent ruling in a case by the NMB, but Chris feels there most certainly is.

A study and roadmap of the case law based on the premise that a new bargaining agent can get around the award and make the Nicolau award moot will cost 5 to 7 billable hours, so about $1925 with this firm.

When I stated that our Chairman Doug Parker had expressed an interest in industry consolidation he replied "well you know this process can work in reverse". That is, if we had a merger with United then even before there was an arbitration process the United pilots would petition the NMB for "single carrier status" and we could find ourselves back in the same position as we are now, inside ALPA. The Nicolau award won't die until ALPA dies. If there are mergers down the road then the award can come back if ALPA does. Seniority lives in the CBA so you need a new contract to go with the new union to solidify your claims. Can something be put in the contact to protect these claims, I asked. "That question will require a lot of research". Katzenbach and Khitikan seem to be competent in this area although they are not experts in Railway Labor Act /
NMB law. Chris stated that there are very few firms who specialize in RLA/NMB law, it's a very small portion of labor law pie.

This consultation is not free, they don't do that with this kind of case, but they have low rates ie, $275/hr. My name is the one given so I will pony up on this meeting and the firm will supply a resume of their qualifications to do this kind of law and a recap and their opinions on what was discussed and I will forward that information when I get it so that all can see what type of law firm this is and if we want to do business with them in the future.

Respectfully Submitted,

an aaapilots4fairness committee member


       
 

 

 

[EastUS1]

Greed huh?.....
 
You're nothing more than a brat who is no longer getting attention.

You have nothing in common with Eric Ferguson, .......

 
1) Yes, coupled with incredible levels of infantile narcisissm and a wholesale disrespect for your fellow human beings. What kinder term than "Greed" exists for describing people who would cheerfully and "righteously" want themselves placed ahead of others who've already worked some 16+ years more than themselves?
 
2) That has the appearance of personal projection. Your "heroic" avatar, with all those impressive "medals and decorations" certainly does offer substance to some sad need for attention.
 
3) Thank God!

 

[Phoenix]

I think the APA should take note of your wish for the demise of the APA. Are you going to take those funds which are in dispute and have another "conversation with an attorney" to get out future agreements which involve the APA?
 
Here's the THE SMOKING GUN!!!   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.
 
 
 
 

A Conversation with an Attorney​

KEEP THIS INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL​

On Saturday, June 9th in San Francisco I had a conversation regarding our case with Chris Katzenbach of Katzenbach and Khitikan, a labor law firm.Katzenbach and Khitikan have done some NMB work primarily with the American Eagle pilots group and they helpd them set up a 501C3 non-profit format to hold the Eagle Pilots independent union which is involved in an organizing campaign to oust ALPA from that property.In commenting on our case he said that as an outsider he really had to hand it to the opposing counsel in the final brief for the America West Pilots. He understands, in some respects, the issues involving airline seniority. He said however that to an outsider the America West brief was very convincing and easy to follow. This doesn't make it right or more fair, it's just an easier to follow and better presentation to follow than the Katz presentation. The America West brief, appears a least on the surface, to be more in line with the stated new ALPA merger policy. It ignores past president but if you only have the current policy as a point of reference then their argument seems more in tune with it.Chris Katzenbach feels that a direct assault on this award in the courts is a looser. The courts don't want to be educated on the minutia of this case or any other complicated private matter. The courts only concern is if there is fraud or bribery or some other gross misconduct in the conduct of this arbitration. If pressed they would take a case like that but he feels it to be a looser. It would also probably require a substantial down payment up front to pursue. By the way their fees are very reasonable, $275.00 per billable hour.I next specifically asked him about the formation of a new bargaining agent as an avenue of advance to get around this award. He says that it is entirely possible. The key the courts look for is not the private squabbles, procedures and methodologies between unions and their nationals, the facts of the collective bargaining agreement. The CBA is the defining argument in a case to the courts. The Railway Labor Act /National Mediation Board procedure and policy above all governs."Could the America West pilots sue us" I asked, "if we pursue this course of action." "Yes", he said however Duty of Fair representation suits are losers, Katzenbach and Khitikan sued ALPA for the American Eagle Pilots over their current contract which among other things had a 20 year no strike clause. The contract was a negotiating committee cram down to keep from having the Eagle flying farmed out and allowing for the American equivalent version of "jets for jobs" and "flow through." Does this sound familiar?? As a result of this contract the Eagle pilots are trying to get out of ALPA.Chris said the contract was truly piece of "####" but because it was negotiated by the duly elected negotiating committee it would stand in court. They lost big-time and that's that. So to answer the question, yes you can be sued but they must prove fraud or other really gross violations of law to have the suit stand up. However, he cautioned, 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 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.In a ruling by the NLRB, not the NMB, in 1954, stated: Seniority status in mergers must be resolved between the the employer and the union not by the union unilaterally. 107 NLRB 837;225F.2nd.343. That is to say seniority lives in the collective bargaining agreement not inside the unions. It will cost some more money to find if there is an equivalent ruling in a case by the NMB, but Chris feels there most certainly is.A study and roadmap of the case law based on the premise that a new bargaining agent can get around the award and make the Nicolau award moot will cost 5 to 7 billable hours, so about $1925 with this firm.When I stated that our Chairman Doug Parker had expressed an interest in industry consolidation he replied "well you know this process can work in reverse". That is, if we had a merger with United then even before there was an arbitration process the United pilots would petition the NMB for "single carrier status" and we could find ourselves back in the same position as we are now, inside ALPA. The Nicolau award won't die until ALPA dies. If there are mergers down the road then the award can come back if ALPA does. Seniority lives in the CBA so you need a new contract to go with the new union to solidify your claims. Can something be put in the contact to protect these claims, I asked. "That question will require a lot of research". Katzenbach and Khitikan seem to be competent in this area although they are not experts in Railway Labor Act /NMB law. Chris stated that there are very few firms who specialize in RLA/NMB law, it's a very small portion of labor law pie.This consultation is not free, they don't do that with this kind of case, but they have low rates ie, $275/hr. My name is the one given so I will pony up on this meeting and the firm will supply a resume of their qualifications to do this kind of law and a recap and their opinions on what was discussed and I will forward that information when I get it so that all can see what type of law firm this is and if we want to do business with them in the future.Respectfully Submitted,an aaapilots4fairness committee member

Don't sweat it. The Nic does still stand to the extent provided for by the 2005 TA. But don't distract yourself... The present issue is not about USAPA, it is about the West Request for a merger committee pursuant to the PA and MB.