April/May 2013 Pilot Discussion

[Pi brat]

Not a single one of them have even countered the numerous statements in the company's filing from this weekend- nothing new here. Ignore devastating news and just go about their merry ways. Maybe we will get another dream from Joe Greeter about Addington not being ripe. Lol.

The company is not the judge so who needs to counter their statements? They don't get to decide and their opinion is worth as much as the opinions of Marty and Pat-the paper it's written on.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Ripeness is a given- all parties of interest except one think so.
Injunction issued by July
POR August 31
West pilots take 330 captain bids in Fall.
USAPA gone by December
A few disgruntled AFO easties try to sue the APA and the company- case goes nowhere. Eventually, interest wanes as the AFOs retire, see the futility in their efforts and realize they need to purchase a small piece of land with a trailer on it to afford retirement.
A sad ending for such a bitter group

"Our conclusion that Plaintiffs' claim is not ripe is consistent with our DFR decisions, which have found DFR violations based on contract negotiation only after a contract has been agreed upon.5 See, e.g., Williams v. Pac. Mar. Ass'n, 617 F.2d 1321, 1328, 1330 (9th Cir. 1980) (involving suit for breach of DFR in negotiating CBA brought after rules at issue were adopted); Bernard v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, 873 F.2d 213, 215 (9th Cir. 1989) (involving suit for breach of DFR during negotiations brought after agreement between union and employer was reached); Hendricks v. Airline Pilots Ass'n, 696 F.2d 673, 674-75 (9th Cir. 1983) (same)." Not MY words, but the Ninth Circuit. You lose.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Ripe

T-13 days

#### slap for AwFOL. T-13.

 

[Claxon]

Are the arbitrators suppose to ignore the law of M/B? Read the law before you start making unsupportable statements. Paragraph A1 and C. What year was the US Airways merger? What year did M/B become effective? usapa does represent ALL US Airways pilots correct? At the time of our merger both pilot groups were represented by ALPA, the same union and we used that merger policy.

M/B does not apply and can not be used to integrate east and west pilots. I will go with option 1 east pilots were tricked.

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008
HR 2764
SEC. 117. LABOR INTEGRATION.
(a) LABOR INTEGRATION.—With respect to any covered transaction involving two or more covered air
carriers that results in the combination of crafts or classes that are subject to the Railway Labor Act
(45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.), sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions imposed by the Civil
Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger (as published at 59 C.A.B. 45) shall apply to
the integration of covered employees of the covered air carriers; except that—
(1) if the same collective bargaining agent represents the combining crafts or classes at each
of the covered air carriers, that collective bargaining agent’s internal policies regarding
integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede the requirements of this
section; and
(2) the requirements of any collective bargaining agreement that may be applicable to the
terms of integration involving covered employees of a covered air carrier shall not be
affected by the requirements of this section as to the employees covered by that agreement,
so long as those provisions allow for the protections afforded by sections 3 and 13 of the
Allegheny-Mohawk provisions.
( B) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) AIR CARRIER.—The term ‘‘air carrier’’ means an air carrier that holds a certificate issued
under chapter 411 of title 49, United States Code.
(2) COVERED AIR CARRIER.—The term ‘‘covered air carrier’’ means an air carrier that is
involved in a covered transaction.
(3) COVERED EMPLOYEE.—The term ‘‘covered employee’’ means an employee who—
(A) is not a temporary employee; and
( B) is a member of a craft or class that is subject to the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C.
151 et seq.).
(4) COVERED TRANSACTION.—The term ‘‘covered transaction’’ means—
(A) a transaction for the combination of multiple air carriers into a single air carrier;
and which
( B) involves the transfer of ownership or control of—
(i) 50 percent or more of the equity securities (as defined in section 101 of
title 11, United States Code) of an air carrier; or
(ii) 50 percent or more (by value) of the assets of the air carrier.
© APPLICATION.—This section shall not apply to any covered transaction involving a covered air
carrier that took place before the date of enactment of this Act.
(d) EFFECTIVENESS OF PROVISION.—This section shall become effective on the date of enactment of this
Act and shall continue in effect in fiscal years after fiscal year 2008.

Is judge Silver suppose to ignore the words of the T/A?

Do you think judge Silver forgot she also wrote:
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment dismissing
Counts I and III of the complaint and in favor of US Airline Pilots Association on Count II
of the complaint stating US Airline Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach
its duty of fair representation provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose.

What do you think the first question judge Silver is going to ask usapa?

"Here comes Captain Gay again, disguising a lecture in a question....NO" Scott Kirby

 

[end_of_alpa]

Unbelievable!

FWIW, MSNBC said it was National Airlines. If so, they're based at JFK and we have a bunch of former National pilots who work here at US.

Condolences to family and friends.

Agreed. How sad.

 

[flyer63]

I know one of their current pilots who was not killed. she has been in the non sked world for a long time and it could of just as easily been her. Very sad, she said one of pilots had small kids at home. Looks like a shifted load at first glance

 

[Graceson]

Ok, lets say its ripe. Then what?

Is USAPA entitled to a fair trial to determine if it has breached its DFR while following the provisions of the TA? Are USAPA representational rights and responsibilities altered at all while the trial proceeds?

Will Silver dispense with any necessity for a trial and simply find that USAPA must use the Nic in all ways according to the TA (a product of the TA)? Would such an injunction limit itself to the stipulations of the TA or would she invent some more?

Or will SIlver just delay and let the arbitrators decide under MB, since that is where this is headed anyway.

Ripeness is all about verifiable harm. She'll need to know how many are now harmed. Who is harmed. To what degree.

She'll want specifics. She'll ask the west to produce the composed list in question which demonstrates harm to who and to what degree. If the list is strict DOH without restrictions then the list merely represents the west worst fear. To fairly assess the degree of harm to who and how many, shell ask to see the list with applied variables, considerations, and restrictions. Neither east nor west will be able to produce, with credible certainty, a finalized list complete with varibles, considerations, and restrictions which are yet defined by a process outlined in the agreed upon MOU.

With harm determined to be immeasurable and thus remedy indeterminable, the court must decide if harm, to any degree, is irreparable. Since material entities and assets, for all intents and purposes, are nonexhastible and nonperishable, then harm is not irreparable should it be found real and not imagined.

 

[flyer63]

Exactly, where is the list that produces the harm. this will be thrown out and this situation will be taken over on events. "All the risk is with the west"

 

[Zone5]

I relieved to see the lemmings in Alberta are doing just fine. It was more of analogy than anything. Better than Usapians after all this smoke clears. I understand that
you hard liners are in the minority and the majority of East pilots I have run into think more like PSA and Trader.

Therefore not all East pilots are lemmings. Just the ones following the likes of Bradford and Cleary. I guess you'll get a little wet after this is all over but you will survive the Nicolau.

"The majority of East pilots I have run into think more like PSA and Trader." Now that's really funny! Talk about out of touch. PSA and Trader couldn't get company for dinner or a beer out of the "majority" of East pilots on an overnight. I don't know what you think you know about East pilots, but much like your understanding of the migratory habits of Lemmings, it appears to be totally of of touch with reality!


seajay

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Where is the "knife thrust?" Nothing, nothing at all changes for US Airways pilots in ANY way until the POR.

Why did Marty once again prematurely adjudicate? Because he knows it’s all over for the NIC on the date of the POR. Then the new Transition Agreement ratified by all takes effect.

Greeter

 

[end_of_alpa]

http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/seniority/
SENIORITY'S DECLINING ROLE

As the economy has changed over the past 40 to 60 years—shifting from a manufacturing economy to an economy based on services, absorbing large numbers of women into the workforce, and becoming more globally interdependent—expectations of work have changed. In the past it was far more likely that a person would work much, if not all, of his or her career with a single employer. This in no longer the case. As mobility has increased in the workforce, the role of seniority has diminished. Declining union membership as a percentage of the workforce has also contributed to the reduced role of seniority as an important factor in employment decisions.
While seniority was valued in the past, for many people today, the longer you have been with a company, the more your job may be in jeopardy. Technology is cited as a primary reason for this change. Younger workers are perceived as more creative and innovative and may have more relevant educational experiences and training. Just as the product life cycle has shortened, so too has the career cycle of employees. Today job change and diversity of experiences is valued more than seniority. Companies are under great competitive pressure and have less tolerance for employees who are earning in excess of their output, a situation more common among the most senior members of an organization. Today an older employee can be replaced by someone younger earning less than half as much salary.
But will that always be the case? As the influential baby boom generation begins to depart the workforce, most observers see a shortage of skills and a potentially serious shortfall in the supply of labor looming in the very near future. The conclusion of a report on a human resource director's survey, conducted by IBM and reported on in the Economist, states the situation this way: "When the baby-boom generation retires, many companies will find out too late that a career's worth of experience has walked out the door, leaving insufficient talent to fill the void."
In anticipation of this demographic shift, efforts are being made by some foresighted firms to maintain those with seniority and experience. Employees who are reaching retirement age are being encouraged to consider a phased withdrawal from the labor force. The use of job-sharing arrangements and part-time work schedules are two ways that are becoming more common for senior personnel in the stage a phased retirement. These flexible work arrangements allow an employee to ease out of the work habit while providing the company with an opportunity to use the senior employee's skills to train newer employees before the departure of senior employees.

 

[Zone5]

http://www.liveleak....=c32_1367332518

Bagram Airfield Crash 29 APR 2013

Based on the aircraft deck angle after rotation, the apparent resulting deep rolling stall and that they never even got the gear up, I sure think it looks like control of the aircraft was compromised. Possibly a terrorist act, the Taliban is already claiming responsibility. Possibly a massive cargo shift.


seajay

 

[Bill Brasky]

Based on the aircraft deck angle after rotation, the apparent resulting deep rolling stall and that they never even got the gear up, I sure think it looks like control of the aircraft was compromised. Probably a terrorist act, the Taliban is already claiming responsibility.


seajay

Looks to me like the load shifted on rotation, pushing the CG way too far aft. Pilot didn't even get the gear up before he knew he was in trouble. I don't know for sure, but it looks likely from the video.

 

[EastUS1]

It's a generational thing, "I want it now."

It seems so, coupled with delusional fantasies of excessive self worth, and naturally with that; a complete lack of respect for any other people.

 

[CallawayGolf]

It seems so, coupled with a complete lack of respect for any other people.

As opposed to those who refuse to abide by the terms of their contractual agreements or to accept the results of final and binding arbitration?

How exactly does an expectation that all parties in a contract honor their agreements demonstrate a complete lack of respect for other people? Seems to me that living up to one's agreement, even to one's own detriment, is paramount to showing respect to others.