April/May 2013 Pilot Discussion

[cleardirect]

I get all of that and actually agree with you, AMR and the company that for practical matters the CBA is done. The issue I see is that it is all contingent on the merger going through. It certain looks like it will, but mergers fall apart everyday. That and the fact that they MOU called for a CBA between east and west and we don't have that yet. But, what happens then? Can she make her ruling contingent on the merger going through? Serious questions, not baiting.

Even if the merger fall apart. We still need an answer. With or without a merger.

 

[Pi brat]

Even if the merger fall apart. We still need an answer. With or without a merger.

Sure we do and I'd like one as much as anyone, but then it's a whole different set of circumstances. It will be a whole different contract, and we are back to the TA voting provisions. That's the issue I see with ripeness. The 9th point seemed to be that you have to get there and look back to see what "fair" is, that there are too many contingencies to make that ruling ahead of time. We still have contingencies. Trust me, many pilots at this airline bet their 401ks that the UA merger was a "done deal."

 

[Crzipilot]

This is what the ninth said.



Nowhere did the ninth say an implemented seniority list. Notice the word proposal.

The parties completed negotiations.
The membership ratified the MOU. According to US Airways and AMR that is a JCBA.

What part of the ninth's requirements have not been fulfilled?

Did the 9th not say this?!?!?

We can both pull out sections and such to support our argument. I guess we'll have to wait until the judges decide....etc...

 

[snapthis]

LOL

Communications Committee
May 8, 2013
USAPA Update - Intervention by American in Addington II

Yesterday, May 7, 2013, American Airlines and its parent company AMR Corporation (referred to as "American") filed a motion in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, seeking to intervene pursuant to Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in Addington II, (Docs. 56-57), "for limited purposes to protect interests in this litigation that are different from those of the parties."

In its motion to intervene, American clearly asserts (like US Airways) that it is taking no position on the merits of the underlying dispute in Addington II. American claims it seeks intervention on a limited basis in this case simply to:

inform the District Court of the risks to the merger process that could be created by an overly broad preliminary injunction (should plaintiffs prevail in their preliminary injunction application), and
advise the District Court of its agreement with US Airways' position that the underlying DFR claim by plaintiffs is ripe for consideration by the Court.
The overarching message of American's motion to intervene is that it wants this litigation resolved expeditiously and on the merits, in order to avoid any delay in, or harm to, the merger process.

With respect to ripeness, American's motion simply adopts the position of US Airways without any further argument, except that American also claims that the instant dispute is ripe because of the harm to American that may result from a dismissal of Addington II on ripeness grounds. This argument is legally insignificant to the question of the ripeness of plaintiff's claims (not American's, and not US Airways') that USAPA has breached its duty of fair representation. The standard for determining ripeness in this case has been clearly set forth by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Addington I, and reiterated by Judge Silver in her decision last fall granting summary judgment to USAPA in US Airways' action for Declaratory Judgment. Plaintiffs (in apparent coordination with US Airways and American) still do not satisfy this standard for all of the reasons set forth in USAPA's submissions to the Court in Addington II, including, but not limited to, the fact that the MOU is not the final agreement upon which ripeness of plaintiffs' claim was conditioned by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

American's motion to intervene adds nothing of legal significance to the resolution of USAPA's motion to dismiss or plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. Instead, it is merely an unsubtle attempt to further pressure the District Court into deviating from the correct legal standard for ripeness, set forth by the Ninth Circuit, and Judge Silver's previous decision in US Airways' Declaratory Judgment action.

USAPA's reply with respect to its motion to dismiss is due to be filed tomorrow, May 9, and a joint statement concerning the May 14 hearing is due to be filed on Friday, May 10. The hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, May 14, beginning at 10:00 a.m., in the District Court in Phoenix.


USAPA Communications


Recent filings in Addington II, now available in the Legal Library:

Doc 55, Notice of Firm Name Change
Doc 56, AMR Application to Intervene
Doc 56-1, Proposed Order
Doc 57, AMR Memo in Support of Application to Intervene
Doc 57-1, Exhibit A to AMR Application to Intervene
Doc 57-2, Exhibit B to AMR Application to Intervene

 

[nevergiveup]

"neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for changing the seniority lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the process set forth in this Paragraph 10."
It could be a long, long, time.

 

[Phoenix]

. Ripeness is not an issue anymore. usapa needs an LUP next week. That is what you guys should be worried about not ripeness.

Ok, I'll say it again. Lets assume its ripe now and Silver has jurisdiction to proceed to judge if USAPA is guilty of a DFR...

Is she going to assume USAPA is guilty and require them to provide a LUP to escape penalty, or is she going to assume USAPA is innocent until the plaintiff provides proof USAPA has failed to act according to a minimum standard of fairness?

LUP is a pipe dream. It assumes guilt and puts the burden on the defendant. Fail.

The plaintiff needs a minimum standard of fairness and must show USAPA has not met that. Best of luck.

 

[Zone5]

"“We don’t need to boil the ocean,” chief operating officer Robert Isom told the managers. “Everything doesn’t have to be integrated.”
The fleets, for example, are largely distinct and should be operated that way. American largely has Boeing aircraft, while US Airways uses Airbus. About 20 percent of merger items will remain separate like the fleets, Isom said. But he added that American could borrow US Airways’ maintenance and pilot training for Airbus, and save time and expense."

Imagine that! Everything doesn't have to be integrated and the fleets will remain separate. Doesn't sound to me that, management is in any "rush" to complete the operational integration of the fleets and therefore the pilot SLI. They have every intention of letting the "New process" as stipulated in the MOU timeline proceed. That process specifically calls for a SLI timeline and methodology, Judge Silver will not interfere with this process as agreed to by the four parties, AMR, LCC, APA and USAPA.


seajay

 

[Phoenix]

What are the chances of Judge Silver throwing the whole MOU out?

98% odds against.

 

[Zone5]

No. That's the injustice of the hybrid DFR. Don't worry, when this is over, you can bet Doug Parker's company is getting sued on all fronts next. Johnny come lately's "neutrality" is going to bite him on the ass.

I'm sure that the management of an 11 Billion Dollar corporation, equipped with an army of lawyers, is not going to be loosing much sleep over your lame-assed threats of future litigation!

Once again, at the end of the day, management does not care specifically who is flying the jets, just as long as someone is and someone will be. They have already stated publicly (today) that fleet integration is not a priority. The "New process" will move forward as agreed and will be completed within the next few years. If AOL, or anyone else for that matter, doesn't like the outcome.......well, like I said, the company has an ARMY of lawyers!


seajay

 

[prechilill]

I'm sure that the management of an 11 Billion Dollar corporation, equipped with an army of lawyers, is not going to be loosing much sleep over your lame-assed threats of future litigation!

Once again, at the end of the day, management does not care specifically who is flying the jets, just as long as someone is and someone will be. They have already stated publicly (today) that fleet integration is not a priority. The "New process" will move forward as agreed and will be completed within the next few years. If AOL, or anyone else for that matter, doesn't like the outcome.......well, like I said, the company has an ARMY of lawyers!


seajay

Good post exposing why the USAPs are now irrelevant to Parker. The new minority served its purpose well but business is now ready to move. Parker, I'm certain, appreciates your sacrifices under LOA 93.

 

[Res Judicata]

If Silver tosses this on ripeness, Parker is going to simply inform the fake union that he has a list, and will shove the Nic up USAPAS six. He'll simply say, "sue me". Which USTUPID will be long gone before that suit goes anywhere and the APA won't touch it. This is getting resolved BEFORE the POR one way or another. You scabs have run out if places to hide and the day of reckoning is here.

 

[Pi brat]

[4] A question is fit for decision when it can be decided
without considering “contingent future events that may or
may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all.”

 

[Pi brat]

If Silver tosses this on ripeness, Parker is going to simply inform the fake union that he has a list, and will shove the Nic up USAPAS six. He'll simply say, "sue me". Which USTUPID will be long gone before that suit goes anywhere and the APA won't touch it. This is getting resolved BEFORE the POR one way or another. You scabs have run out if places to hide and the day of reckoning is here.

Why? Why wouldn't it be easier for him to just abide by the MOU?

 

[Pi brat]

"[5] We conclude that this case presents contingencies that
could prevent effectuation of USAPA’s proposal and the
accompanying injury."


Did anyone talk to the Justice Dept., or US shareholders before they filed this suit?

 

[Pi brat]

"[6] We also conclude that withholding judicial consideration
does not work a direct and immediate hardship on the
West Pilots."


No change there, raises for everyone!