April/May 2013 Pilot Discussion

[cleardirect]

It can be used if we all agree to use the process, and we did.

Really! In your world parties can agree to ignore federal law?

usapa C&BL are superior to federal law?

You may be willing to violate federal law but I doubt the arbitrators are.

(c) 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.

The language is very clear. This SHALL NOT apply. It does not say it may not or might not apply. It does not say if the parties agree you can ignore it.

If you were right post the exception to the law where by agreement the law can be ignored.

 

[EastUS1]

Condolences to family and friends.

+1.

There, but for fortune...

 

[EastUS1]

The language is very clear. This SHALL NOT apply. It does not say it may not or might not apply. It does not say if the parties agree you can ignore it.

"This section shall not apply to any covered transaction..." So; you're now positing that the nic represents a completed transaction? How amusing. Why all the six years of courtroom dramas then? Prove your point. Go ahead and bid anything based on the nic. No luck? I can't imagine why that would be.

 

[EastUS1]

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.

How "noble in reason". What you're actually demanding is the ability to contemptuously usurp as much as 17 worked years of other people's lives...and all purely for your own selfish gains. You're cordially invited to layer on as many more tons of pure and unadulterated BS as you can manage, although topping the levels already demonstrated for the past six years would truly represent an Herculean endeavor.

 

[Beancounter]

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.

When I saw the initial pitch angle, before the stall, I thought of an Ernest Gann novel. In it the load shifts and they almost hit the Taj Mahal. Like you and several others said, probably a load shift. Condolences to their family and friends. It's painfull to watch.

Bean

 

[end_of_alpa]

Really! In your world parties can agree to ignore federal law?

usapa C&BL are superior to federal law?

You may be willing to violate federal law but I doubt the arbitrators are.




The language is very clear. This SHALL NOT apply. It does not say it may not or might not apply. It does not say if the parties agree you can ignore it.

If you were right post the exception to the law where by agreement the law can be ignored.

"In the area of labor relations, "seniority" is a term that connotes length of employment. A "seniority system" is a scheme that, alone or in tandem with non-"seniority" criteria, allots to employees ever improving employment rights and benefits as their relative lengths of pertinent employment increase. Unlike other methods of allocating employment benefits and opportunities, such as subjective evaluations or educational requirements the principal feature of any and every "seniority system" is that preferential treatment is dispensed on the basis of some measure of time served in employment." CALIFORNIA BREWERS ASSN. v. BRYANT, 444 U.S. 598 (1980)

 

[end_of_alpa]

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.

As opposed to those who think their status in life is greater than those that have already served. So, you must be in the reserves bucking for that Drone battle medal they give out at Nellis.

 

[CallawayGolf]

How "noble in reason". What you're actually demanding is the ability to contemptuously usurp as much as 17 worked years of other people's lives...and all purely for your own selfish gains. You're cordially invited to layer on as many more tons of pure and unadulterated BS as you can manage, although topping the levels already demonstrated for the past six years would truly represent an Herculean endeavor.

Expecting people to abide by contractual agreements is now considered a contemptuous usurpation in EastUS' new moral code. Got it.

 

[EastUS1]

What you're actually demanding is the ability to contemptuously usurp as much as 17 worked years of other people's lives...and all purely for your own selfish gains.

Expecting people to abide by contractual agreements is now considered a contemptuous usurpation in EastUS' new moral code. Got it.

"new moral code"...? "You're cordially invited to layer on as many more tons of pure and unadulterated BS as you can manage,.." Well, no surprise here. That sure didn't take long at all for you to try...." although topping the levels already demonstrated for the past six years would truly represent an Herculean endeavor." No matter. Keep shoveling it on.

 

[cleardirect]

"In the area of labor relations, "seniority" is a term that connotes length of employment. A "seniority system" is a scheme that, alone or in tandem with non-"seniority" criteria, allots to employees ever improving employment rights and benefits as their relative lengths of pertinent employment increase. Unlike other methods of allocating employment benefits and opportunities, such as subjective evaluations or educational requirements the principal feature of any and every "seniority system" is that preferential treatment is dispensed on the basis of some measure of time served in employment." CALIFORNIA BREWERS ASSN. v. BRYANT, 444 U.S. 598 (1980)

You can cite all the cases you want.
Federal law is where those cases come from. Fair and equitable is the standard for M/B.

Passed as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, the McCaskill-Bond
Amendment provides a process for achieving a “fair and equitable” seniority integration of
employee groups affected by the combination of two or more airlines.

Section 3 of the LPPs provides that, where applicable, the carrier and the representatives of
the affected employee groups shall attempt to achieve through collective bargaining a “fair
and equitable” seniority integration. If the parties are not able to reach an agreement on a “fair
and equitable” seniority integration through negotiations, the dispute will be submitted to a
neutral arbitrator for a final and binding resolution.

I don't see anything about time served even mentioned. Fair and equitable is the standard, nothing to do with time.

 

[CallawayGolf]

What you're actually demanding is the ability to contemptuously usurp as much as 17 worked years of other people's lives...and all purely for your own selfish gains.



"new moral code"...? "You're cordially invited to layer on as many more tons of pure and unadulterated BS as you can manage,.." Well, no surprise here. That sure didn't take long at all for you to try.

Oh sorry, didn't know there was more to it. Okay, so expecting people to abide by their contractual agreements is considered not only a contemptuous usurpation but also pure and unadulterated BS. You sure have negative thoughts towards people honoring their contractual obligations. Perhaps you have more pejorative terms I should add to your ever-growing list of thoughts for those who actually think people should abide by their agreements. By the way, do you pile on the praise whenever you see a person abrogate his or her contractual obligations?

 

[EastUS1]

I don't see anything about time served even mentioned.....nothing to do with time.

Infantile and narcicisstic greed, paired with delusionally inflated notions of excessive self-worth, can best attempt to be "justified" only by those most afflicted with such.

 

[Pi brat]

Really! In your world parties can agree to ignore federal law?

usapa C&BL are superior to federal law?

You may be willing to violate federal law but I doubt the arbitrators are.




The language is very clear. This SHALL NOT apply. It does not say it may not or might not apply. It does not say if the parties agree you can ignore it.

If you were right post the exception to the law where by agreement the law can be ignored.

It cannot be forced upon someone by that wording, but parties agree to things all the time. In NC there are strict guidelines on child support, but when when I divorced my ex and I agreed to terms that were more generous for her. Should I be worried that we "broke the law?"

It's not using the law, it's saying that we agree the process will work for us so we will use the same thing. It's really like the current ALPA merger policy-negotiate and then if no success, arbitrate before a party of 3.

If you guys didn't like that, you should have voted against it. If you had the MOU would have failed.

 

[EastUS1]

.... for those who actually think people should abide by their agreements.

I've made but one agreement/personal promise anywhere, and at any point in time with this mess here. I will never vote in favor of anything containing the nic. Good luck with your BS shoveling, as the only people who'll ever be truly impressed by it are your fellow...umm.."spartans" in your little "army", and there's no present need to do anything other than laugh at the lot of you.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Looks like a shifted load at first glance

My thought exactly. Time for some electrical switch monitoring of the position of the latches in the cargo bay. Long overdue, IMHO.