In your case it is a double or nothing loss.
April/May 2013 Pilot Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
In your case it is a double or nothing loss.
snapthis
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2009
- 4,236
- 6,907
With your dislike for the East pilots, I have to ask.....why are you standing up for him?
Just more proof that he is a Westie.
Move is probably sitting there thinking..."Oh Dave, don't try to help me"
breeze
Yes they are own up to the fact your a WEST PILOT! AHOLE!
HOW pissed must you be at AOL? One can only imagine the the fanfair of a minor dispute dragged into FEDERAL COURT, the "HYPOCRISY" effects us all! Be prepaired on TUESDAY to be major pissed when those ARMYOFUSUNHIREABLES do you a "DUH" all over again! Hey it is ur dues at work! AS for us EASTIES LOFAO!
One can only imagine how you feel about ADDINGTON I, The idea , they know it is not ripe call in BALDOCK, his influence WAKE, and use political contacts to influence outside the law alternatives, absolutely digusting to the justice system!
BOUT TIME THE GLOVES COME OFF!
cltrat
Veteran
- Aug 29, 2007
- 5,481
- 3,051
if he is move2clt tell him the Davidson realtors come to the airport looking for him
Harry Callahan
Veteran
snapthis
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2009
- 4,236
- 6,907
May 11, 2013
Leonidas Update
Numerous pleadings have been filed in the final days leading to the May 14th preliminary injunction hearing. Of the more notable is the Motion to Consolidate the Preliminary Injunction Hearing with a trial on the Merits (Doc 60). As outlined in that motion, the former America West Pilots (West Pilots) argued that there is no issue of material fact and that the trial on the merits should be consolidated with the preliminary injunction hearing. If the Court were to grant this motion, then Judge Silver’s decision on the preliminary injunction would be a final judgment. There are many supporting documents that reinforce our Motion including a detailed Separate Statement of Facts (Doc. 14) supported by an extensive appendix of evidence (Docs 14-1, 14-2, 14-3) along with more recently filed exhibits and their supporting declarations (Docs. 61, 61-1, 62, 62-1, 62-2, 62-3). On May 9, 2013 Defendant US Airways filed a response to our Motion to Consolidate agreeing that consolidation is appropriate but taking issue with our characterization of the MOU as an agreement between US Airways and USPA to abandon the Nicolau Award. (Doc 64).
On May 7, 2013, AMR Corporation and American Airlines, Inc. (AA) filed an Application to Intervene (Doc 56). AMR and American ask the Court to allow them intervention for limited purposes and to protect “significant interests.” AMR and American told the Court that if the Court were inclined to grant the injunctive relief requested by the West Pilots, the language proposed by the West Pilots in Doc 53-1, “would, in American’s view, be adequate to protect its interests.” (Doc 57). AMR and American also agreed with the West Pilots and US Airways that this matter is ripe for decision, specifically stating that the MOU “constitutes a collective bargaining agreement among the four parties.” (Doc. 57). There are several documents in support of their motion (Docs. 56-1, 57, 57-1, 57-2). We filed a Notice of Non-Opposition to the AMR/AA Motion (Doc 59) as did US Airways (Doc 63).
The West Pilots filed a Motion to Join Allied Pilots Association (APA) on May 8, 2013 to our case (Doc 58). With the strong likelihood that APA will be the successor union, and if we succeed in Judge Silver’s Court, joinder of APA will aid in preventing future litigation as to whether they are bound by an injunction issued here. On May 10, 2013, attorneys from James & Hoffman were granted pro hac admission to appear in front of Judge Silver on this matter.
To round out a very busy week of pleadings, on May 9, 2013 USAPA filed their Reply Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss (Doc 65). USAPA still insists that our claims are wholly without merit and Court should, as a matter of law, dismiss all our claims in their entirety. USAPA is under the belief that we bring no new facts, and that the Addington II case (the US Airways’ DJ Case) gave USAPA the green light to “majority will” over any seniority scheme they wish. The West Pilots completely disagree.
And finally, on May 10, 2013 the parties filed a Joint Status Report for Addington III containing a proposed schedule for the hearing (Doc 76). Despite two attempts to agree on a hearing agenda, agreement was not possible and the status report contains an agenda agreed to by the West Pilots and Airways’ and a separate agenda proposed by USAPA. The ultimate decision regarding the agenda will be ordered by Judge Silver. Filed with the Joint Status Report were a number of filings including exhibit lists of the three parties. Plaintiffs Exhibit List can be found in Doc 82 and USAPA’s at Doc 80. US Airways indicated it would not be filing any exhibits in connection with the May 14, 2013 hearing (Doc 81). The parties’ agreed that there would be no live witnesses at the hearing. Again, as indicated in the Motion to Consolidate, it is the position of the West Pilots that there are no issues of fact that need to be resolved by the Court, thus, there is no need to present live witnesses.
As a note, the various Addington cases have recently been renamed in the effort to use consistent nomenclature. The custom is to label a series of cases in a consistent manner (I, II, III, etc) even if the order of the parties changes from action to action. The original West Pilot Duty of Fair Representation Complaint, filed in September 2008, will be reference as Addington I, the US Airways Declaratory Judgment Complaint, filed in July 2010, will be referenced as Addington II, and the current West Pilot Declaratory Judgment Complaint, filed in March 2013, will be referenced as Addington III. The custom is also to use the less common name even if it is not the first name in the caption of the decision. Hence, ALPA v. O'Neill (the caption for the SCOTUS decision) is known as O'Neill. Simple enough.
The May 14, 2013, 10 a.m. preliminary injunction hearing is open to the public and is located at the Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, 401 W. Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona, Courtroom 601. As a friendly reminder if you plan on attending it is suggested to wear, at a minimum, business casual attire. Also, please show respect to the Court by turning off all electronic devices, and our attorneys have specifically requested that we refrain from ANY vocalisations during the proceedings. The Courtroom will not be open until 9:30 a.m. and as you likely remember, the atrium can get quite warm; however, space is limited so please plan accordingly.
When the hearing is complete, there is no timetable for a ruling from the Court.
Finally, we would once again like to remind everyone of the Meet and Greet with the West attorneys scheduled for Friday, May 17, 2013 at 9 a.m. The location is the Oasis Room of the Coast Phoenix Sky Harbor Hotel, 4300 East Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85034.
We are hopefully on the eve of adjudication, and as you can see in this update alone, a tremendous amount of work is involved to bring our action in this Court. Addington III is possible because of the former America West pilots dedication and support in seeking justice to an issue that was resolved in an arbitration years ago.
Sincerely,
Leonidas, LLC
Click here to Contribute
www.cactuspilot.com
Leonidas Update
Numerous pleadings have been filed in the final days leading to the May 14th preliminary injunction hearing. Of the more notable is the Motion to Consolidate the Preliminary Injunction Hearing with a trial on the Merits (Doc 60). As outlined in that motion, the former America West Pilots (West Pilots) argued that there is no issue of material fact and that the trial on the merits should be consolidated with the preliminary injunction hearing. If the Court were to grant this motion, then Judge Silver’s decision on the preliminary injunction would be a final judgment. There are many supporting documents that reinforce our Motion including a detailed Separate Statement of Facts (Doc. 14) supported by an extensive appendix of evidence (Docs 14-1, 14-2, 14-3) along with more recently filed exhibits and their supporting declarations (Docs. 61, 61-1, 62, 62-1, 62-2, 62-3). On May 9, 2013 Defendant US Airways filed a response to our Motion to Consolidate agreeing that consolidation is appropriate but taking issue with our characterization of the MOU as an agreement between US Airways and USPA to abandon the Nicolau Award. (Doc 64).
On May 7, 2013, AMR Corporation and American Airlines, Inc. (AA) filed an Application to Intervene (Doc 56). AMR and American ask the Court to allow them intervention for limited purposes and to protect “significant interests.” AMR and American told the Court that if the Court were inclined to grant the injunctive relief requested by the West Pilots, the language proposed by the West Pilots in Doc 53-1, “would, in American’s view, be adequate to protect its interests.” (Doc 57). AMR and American also agreed with the West Pilots and US Airways that this matter is ripe for decision, specifically stating that the MOU “constitutes a collective bargaining agreement among the four parties.” (Doc. 57). There are several documents in support of their motion (Docs. 56-1, 57, 57-1, 57-2). We filed a Notice of Non-Opposition to the AMR/AA Motion (Doc 59) as did US Airways (Doc 63).
The West Pilots filed a Motion to Join Allied Pilots Association (APA) on May 8, 2013 to our case (Doc 58). With the strong likelihood that APA will be the successor union, and if we succeed in Judge Silver’s Court, joinder of APA will aid in preventing future litigation as to whether they are bound by an injunction issued here. On May 10, 2013, attorneys from James & Hoffman were granted pro hac admission to appear in front of Judge Silver on this matter.
To round out a very busy week of pleadings, on May 9, 2013 USAPA filed their Reply Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss (Doc 65). USAPA still insists that our claims are wholly without merit and Court should, as a matter of law, dismiss all our claims in their entirety. USAPA is under the belief that we bring no new facts, and that the Addington II case (the US Airways’ DJ Case) gave USAPA the green light to “majority will” over any seniority scheme they wish. The West Pilots completely disagree.
And finally, on May 10, 2013 the parties filed a Joint Status Report for Addington III containing a proposed schedule for the hearing (Doc 76). Despite two attempts to agree on a hearing agenda, agreement was not possible and the status report contains an agenda agreed to by the West Pilots and Airways’ and a separate agenda proposed by USAPA. The ultimate decision regarding the agenda will be ordered by Judge Silver. Filed with the Joint Status Report were a number of filings including exhibit lists of the three parties. Plaintiffs Exhibit List can be found in Doc 82 and USAPA’s at Doc 80. US Airways indicated it would not be filing any exhibits in connection with the May 14, 2013 hearing (Doc 81). The parties’ agreed that there would be no live witnesses at the hearing. Again, as indicated in the Motion to Consolidate, it is the position of the West Pilots that there are no issues of fact that need to be resolved by the Court, thus, there is no need to present live witnesses.
As a note, the various Addington cases have recently been renamed in the effort to use consistent nomenclature. The custom is to label a series of cases in a consistent manner (I, II, III, etc) even if the order of the parties changes from action to action. The original West Pilot Duty of Fair Representation Complaint, filed in September 2008, will be reference as Addington I, the US Airways Declaratory Judgment Complaint, filed in July 2010, will be referenced as Addington II, and the current West Pilot Declaratory Judgment Complaint, filed in March 2013, will be referenced as Addington III. The custom is also to use the less common name even if it is not the first name in the caption of the decision. Hence, ALPA v. O'Neill (the caption for the SCOTUS decision) is known as O'Neill. Simple enough.
The May 14, 2013, 10 a.m. preliminary injunction hearing is open to the public and is located at the Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, 401 W. Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona, Courtroom 601. As a friendly reminder if you plan on attending it is suggested to wear, at a minimum, business casual attire. Also, please show respect to the Court by turning off all electronic devices, and our attorneys have specifically requested that we refrain from ANY vocalisations during the proceedings. The Courtroom will not be open until 9:30 a.m. and as you likely remember, the atrium can get quite warm; however, space is limited so please plan accordingly.
When the hearing is complete, there is no timetable for a ruling from the Court.
Finally, we would once again like to remind everyone of the Meet and Greet with the West attorneys scheduled for Friday, May 17, 2013 at 9 a.m. The location is the Oasis Room of the Coast Phoenix Sky Harbor Hotel, 4300 East Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85034.
We are hopefully on the eve of adjudication, and as you can see in this update alone, a tremendous amount of work is involved to bring our action in this Court. Addington III is possible because of the former America West pilots dedication and support in seeking justice to an issue that was resolved in an arbitration years ago.
Sincerely,
Leonidas, LLC
Click here to Contribute
www.cactuspilot.com
Freighterguynow
Veteran
- Jan 5, 2004
- 1,276
- 1,207
How can Silver rule on anything with an appeal of her previous ruling still pending before the 9th.
They refused to dismiss the companys own request to terminate its own appeal.
Stay pending 9th decision 5 to 1 odds.
They refused to dismiss the companys own request to terminate its own appeal.
Stay pending 9th decision 5 to 1 odds.
Walmartgreeter
Veteran
- Mar 6, 2003
- 1,430
- 1,143
Wait a minute. I have been misled. I thought Prechill had a countdown clock going for the big NIC slam down on Tuesday. I was already loading up my fallout shelter with food, and preparing my family for the worst.
I have GOT to stop believing what I read on web boards posted by random people.
Every time I do so, the stupid law gets in the way of all the postings, emotions, and feelings here.
When will I ever finally learn...
DOH! (that's date of hire, by the way!)
Greeter
exactly!
For youse guys out West, here is your 1963 Dodge 330.....enjoy! However, your have to put in your TIME to be able to get into the left seat. Good luck!
You had your chance west, your nic or nothing attitude gave you nothing. The Court and USAPA requested many times for the west pilots to talk about it, you chose not to. One main reason you are in such terrible legal position today, your law firm wanted damages, you compromising with the East pilots would not have been very lucrative for them. You legal team was motivated at first by greed, now only trying desperately to break even.
You can bring a goat to water, but you can not make him drink.
"October 12, 2012
Captain John Scherff
USAPA Phoenix Domicile Chairman
Dear John,
Given the decision issued by Judge Silver late yesterday, our Union needs to decide where to go on this issue in negotiations with US Airways. I would very much prefer to do that with your participation and agreement instead of continuing the division that has prevailed for so long.
Simply put, are you prepared to discuss and propose any seniority integration other than the NIC on behalf of the Phoenix based pilots? It seems appropriate for me to make this request directly to you as the Phoenix Domicile Chairman.
I make this as a serious request. We all recognize that our pilot group has so far been unable to bridge our internal differences regarding the best way to address our collective seniority concerns. Every pilot knows that it is our collective failure to find a resolution to this issue that prevents us from moving forward. This division on this issue is a major reason for our pilots having gone for so long without any wage increase and why they continue to fall farther behind the industry standard. I believe it is our responsibility as elected Union leaders to find a way to resolve this issue for the good of all of our pilots. The need to find common ground on this issue is even more important given the possibility of a merger between US Airways and American and a possible seniority integration proceeding with the Allied Pilots Association. We will be better able to protect our collective interests if we are working together.
I hope for a prompt affirmative response. We owe the pilots we represent a serious and responsible effort to resolve this issue.
In solidarity,
Gary Hummel, President"
Judge Silver
April 17th, 2013
"Finally, the Court notes that Plaintiffs have already accused USAPA of operating in
bad faith. (Doc. 19). Having handled the previous litigation, the Court is well-aware of the importance of the issues in this case and the unfortunate level of antagonism between the parties. That antagonism, however, will not be permitted to spillover into this litigation.Going forward, the parties must make sincere efforts to reach agreement where possible and to accommodate reasonable requests by the opposing party."
You can bring a goat to water, but you can not make him drink.
"October 12, 2012
Captain John Scherff
USAPA Phoenix Domicile Chairman
Dear John,
Given the decision issued by Judge Silver late yesterday, our Union needs to decide where to go on this issue in negotiations with US Airways. I would very much prefer to do that with your participation and agreement instead of continuing the division that has prevailed for so long.
Simply put, are you prepared to discuss and propose any seniority integration other than the NIC on behalf of the Phoenix based pilots? It seems appropriate for me to make this request directly to you as the Phoenix Domicile Chairman.
I make this as a serious request. We all recognize that our pilot group has so far been unable to bridge our internal differences regarding the best way to address our collective seniority concerns. Every pilot knows that it is our collective failure to find a resolution to this issue that prevents us from moving forward. This division on this issue is a major reason for our pilots having gone for so long without any wage increase and why they continue to fall farther behind the industry standard. I believe it is our responsibility as elected Union leaders to find a way to resolve this issue for the good of all of our pilots. The need to find common ground on this issue is even more important given the possibility of a merger between US Airways and American and a possible seniority integration proceeding with the Allied Pilots Association. We will be better able to protect our collective interests if we are working together.
I hope for a prompt affirmative response. We owe the pilots we represent a serious and responsible effort to resolve this issue.
In solidarity,
Gary Hummel, President"
Judge Silver
April 17th, 2013
"Finally, the Court notes that Plaintiffs have already accused USAPA of operating in
bad faith. (Doc. 19). Having handled the previous litigation, the Court is well-aware of the importance of the issues in this case and the unfortunate level of antagonism between the parties. That antagonism, however, will not be permitted to spillover into this litigation.Going forward, the parties must make sincere efforts to reach agreement where possible and to accommodate reasonable requests by the opposing party."
Freighterguynow
Veteran
- Jan 5, 2004
- 1,276
- 1,207
Wait a minute. I have been misled. I thought Prechill had a countdown clock going for the big NIC slam down on Tuesday.
How frustrating to only be able to hang out your freak flag in Asheville on vacation instead of full time.
How frustrating to only be able to hang out your freak flag in Asheville on vacation instead of full time.
- Status
