Subject: MDA pilots proceeding to court
Date: 31 Mar 2008 02:17 PM
ALPA will likely state that the MDA law suit has been dismissed. Of course, this is not true. The judge did rule that the 6 month statute of limitations does apply to 6 of the complaints filed against ALPA.
However, here comes the GOOD News:
The judge has agreed that ALPA breached its duty to fairly represent the MDA pilots. (But, due to the statute of limitations she has ruled that those 6 portions of the complaint need to be dismissed) However, in her ruling, she opened the door for the lawsuit to be modified in such a way as to sue for damages from ALPA because the “defendants' (ALPA) knowing stipulated to introduce an erroneous seniority list that they knew would adversely affect the careers and employment rights of their represented membersâ€. This is important because she approved the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint based on ALPA’s misconduct at the seniority integration arbitration.
THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF USAIRAWYS EAST PILOTS!
The attorney, Michael Haber, will have the amended complaint ready to file in very short order. The judge has already ruled that the 6 month statute of limitations does not impact this amendment and has authorized the complaint to be amended.
The judges exact words are contained here:
"As plaintiffs point out, defendants misunderstand the gravamen of the Proposed Supplemental Complaint. The alleged breach is not about the process or terms of the arbitration award . . . but that the union knew of, and stipulated to, the introduction of an erroneous, previously-corrected seniority list during the arbitration proceedings. To this allegation, defendants have not offered any reason to deny plaintiffs leave....
"It is also difficult to understand defendants' causation argument that, even if plaintiffs had been designated as active on the seniority list submitted to the arbitrator, their positions on the integrated list would not have been affected. In the Award, the arbitrator made clear that the integrated list merged active US Airways pilots with active America West pilots, but that 'merging active pilots with furloughees, despite the length of service of some of the latter, is not at all fair or equitable under any of the stated criteria.' . . . .
"Accepting [plaintiffs'] allegations as true, and reading the Proposed Supplemental Complaint in the manner most favorable to plaintiffs, plaintiff have adequately alleged that their injuries were caused by the defendants' knowing stipulation to introduce an erroneous seniority list that they knew would adversely affect the careers and employment rights of their represented members. Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint is therefore granted."
This ruling by the judge is significant for ALL USAirways pilots. It means that “ALPA’s 's misconduct at the seniority integration arbitration have survived in Federal Court and will be heard.†– comment by Michael Haber
The seniority integration portion of the Nicolau Award will be heard in COURT! The green light was turned on by the Federal Judge.
It is significant to know that the dismissal portion of her ruling was based on a technicality – statute of limitations. She recognizes this and has ruled in such a way as to give the plaintiffs the vehicle necessary to proceed in the DFR case against ALPA. And proceed they will!
Read this next quote from the judge carefully:
The Amended Complaint makes clear that plaintiffs knew or reasonably should have known as early as the execution of the 2002 LOA, and no later than the 2004 LOA, that defendants had misrepresented MidAtlantic's corporate form to them and bargained away their rights under the CBA. Plaintiffs repeatedly allege that neither US Airways nor defendants informed them that MidAtlantic would not be a separately incorporated entity. However, at the time of the 2002 LOA's execution, plaintiffs had actual notice that the terms of MidAtlantic employment had been negotiated irrespective of MidAtlantic's corporate form....While plaintiffs did not know definitively whether MidAtlantic was a division -- as the agreement only provided that US Airways 'may' operate MidAtlantic as such -- they knew or reasonably should have known that defendants had rendered what plaintiffs claim was an important bargaining factor into an irrelevant one. Plaintiffs allege that MidAtlantic's corporate form was significant because, if MidAtlantic were a division of US Airways, they would have been considered recalled US Airways pilots who were entitled to the terms of the CBA. Plaintiffs were aware of the terms of the 2002 LOA and therefore knew by its execution date that defendants had breached its duty to them by inaccurately representing their interests at the bargaining table....
The law suit will be amended to comply with the judges ruling and the MDA pilots will have their day in court.
Date: 31 Mar 2008 02:17 PM
ALPA will likely state that the MDA law suit has been dismissed. Of course, this is not true. The judge did rule that the 6 month statute of limitations does apply to 6 of the complaints filed against ALPA.
However, here comes the GOOD News:
The judge has agreed that ALPA breached its duty to fairly represent the MDA pilots. (But, due to the statute of limitations she has ruled that those 6 portions of the complaint need to be dismissed) However, in her ruling, she opened the door for the lawsuit to be modified in such a way as to sue for damages from ALPA because the “defendants' (ALPA) knowing stipulated to introduce an erroneous seniority list that they knew would adversely affect the careers and employment rights of their represented membersâ€. This is important because she approved the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint based on ALPA’s misconduct at the seniority integration arbitration.
THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF USAIRAWYS EAST PILOTS!
The attorney, Michael Haber, will have the amended complaint ready to file in very short order. The judge has already ruled that the 6 month statute of limitations does not impact this amendment and has authorized the complaint to be amended.
The judges exact words are contained here:
"As plaintiffs point out, defendants misunderstand the gravamen of the Proposed Supplemental Complaint. The alleged breach is not about the process or terms of the arbitration award . . . but that the union knew of, and stipulated to, the introduction of an erroneous, previously-corrected seniority list during the arbitration proceedings. To this allegation, defendants have not offered any reason to deny plaintiffs leave....
"It is also difficult to understand defendants' causation argument that, even if plaintiffs had been designated as active on the seniority list submitted to the arbitrator, their positions on the integrated list would not have been affected. In the Award, the arbitrator made clear that the integrated list merged active US Airways pilots with active America West pilots, but that 'merging active pilots with furloughees, despite the length of service of some of the latter, is not at all fair or equitable under any of the stated criteria.' . . . .
"Accepting [plaintiffs'] allegations as true, and reading the Proposed Supplemental Complaint in the manner most favorable to plaintiffs, plaintiff have adequately alleged that their injuries were caused by the defendants' knowing stipulation to introduce an erroneous seniority list that they knew would adversely affect the careers and employment rights of their represented members. Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint is therefore granted."
This ruling by the judge is significant for ALL USAirways pilots. It means that “ALPA’s 's misconduct at the seniority integration arbitration have survived in Federal Court and will be heard.†– comment by Michael Haber
The seniority integration portion of the Nicolau Award will be heard in COURT! The green light was turned on by the Federal Judge.
It is significant to know that the dismissal portion of her ruling was based on a technicality – statute of limitations. She recognizes this and has ruled in such a way as to give the plaintiffs the vehicle necessary to proceed in the DFR case against ALPA. And proceed they will!
Read this next quote from the judge carefully:
The Amended Complaint makes clear that plaintiffs knew or reasonably should have known as early as the execution of the 2002 LOA, and no later than the 2004 LOA, that defendants had misrepresented MidAtlantic's corporate form to them and bargained away their rights under the CBA. Plaintiffs repeatedly allege that neither US Airways nor defendants informed them that MidAtlantic would not be a separately incorporated entity. However, at the time of the 2002 LOA's execution, plaintiffs had actual notice that the terms of MidAtlantic employment had been negotiated irrespective of MidAtlantic's corporate form....While plaintiffs did not know definitively whether MidAtlantic was a division -- as the agreement only provided that US Airways 'may' operate MidAtlantic as such -- they knew or reasonably should have known that defendants had rendered what plaintiffs claim was an important bargaining factor into an irrelevant one. Plaintiffs allege that MidAtlantic's corporate form was significant because, if MidAtlantic were a division of US Airways, they would have been considered recalled US Airways pilots who were entitled to the terms of the CBA. Plaintiffs were aware of the terms of the 2002 LOA and therefore knew by its execution date that defendants had breached its duty to them by inaccurately representing their interests at the bargaining table....
The law suit will be amended to comply with the judges ruling and the MDA pilots will have their day in court.
Still = True or False on the Alpa "forgiveness" question, if you will sir.
Whew!..Do I feel the love from Alpa today:
..Please just waitta' minute here for instant and proper amends on my part!...I'll have to return to my previous, and now unseemly gripe, but with properly respectfull terminology = Ummm...Exactly WTF did "Alpa"...ummm..."International" do for the MDA people?..other than "bless" the known-by-them-to-be-bogus "list"? You know? = The "list" that, by their brilliant ommision, staples those folks beneath the most junior AWA new-hires? 
