Scabbing and drug running the america west pilots have done should not be forgotten. The nic is getting to be six years old and will never happen, how long will you want this to be forgotten.
April/May 2013 Pilot Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
Harper and 28j Jacobs (Polsinelli Law Firm) idea of a compromise after The Honorable Judge Silver gave them one last chance
west Legal Argument
A. First Alternative: Order USAPA to use the Nicolau Award.
B. Second Alternative: Order USAPA to conduct a neutral arbitration
to determine whether to use the Nicolau Award or a date-of-hire list.
C. Additional Remedy: Award Plaintiffs attorneys’ fees and expenses
pursuant to common benefit doctrine
west Legal Argument
A. First Alternative: Order USAPA to use the Nicolau Award.
B. Second Alternative: Order USAPA to conduct a neutral arbitration
to determine whether to use the Nicolau Award or a date-of-hire list.
C. Additional Remedy: Award Plaintiffs attorneys’ fees and expenses
pursuant to common benefit doctrine
cleardirect
Veteran
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 6,234
- Reaction score
- 9,749
Compromise? Really! So dispite the years of table pounding about the C&BL demand DOH. Dispite every communication from usapa is DOH. Dispite Paul DOH or death Music being elected.
Now with your contention that the court is about to put an end to the west, usapa is ready and capable of compromise form DOH.
Sure. This from a guy that started a union on a lie.
cactusboy53
Veteran
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 2,649
- Reaction score
- 7,407
Smell that?? It reeks of desperation. Sorry Boo, but you don't matter.
It reeks for you, it is the smell of legal facts against you.
A legal brief to a judge, by USAPA counsel, is not disrespectful or telling her to do anything. The Honorable Judge Silver requested legal information, USAPA counsel is a messenger that brought you the bad news.
This has all been settled in a court of law sir, your frivolous DFR 2 law suit by the
Polsinelli Law Firm is a waste of our legal resources.
"IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
US Airways, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Don Addington, et al.,
Defendants.
))))))))))
No. CV-10-01570-PHX-ROS
AMENDED JUDGMENT
(to add description of class)
Pursuant to the Court’s resolution of the motions for summary judgment,
IT IS ORDERED Counts I and III of the complaint are dismissed and judgment is
entered in favor of US Airline Pilots Association on Count II of the complaint. US Airline
Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation
provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose. This judgment is binding on the
following class: “All pilots employed by US Airways in September 2008 who were on the
America West seniority list on September 20, 2005.”
DATED this 4th day of December, 2012."
The Honorable Judge Silver
cactusboy53: Smell that??......Sorry Boo,
"some sort" of supposed...ummm..."intelect"/intellect ? Fair enough. What "sort"/level would be best accessable for you? 🙂 Perhaps it'd save time in bench-marking to begin here: http://www.ehow.com/...2-year-old.html
"some sort" of supposed...ummm..."intelect"/intellect ? Fair enough. What "sort"/level would be best accessable for you? 🙂 Perhaps it'd save time in bench-marking to begin here: http://www.ehow.com/...2-year-old.html
As long as the changes lock the west pilots into PHX, they will be happy to make changes to the DOH proposal.
cleardirect
Veteran
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 6,234
- Reaction score
- 9,749
Sure. Keep denying that the merger never happen in 2005.
No doubt. Much like you've done for the past six years.
DFR 2 america west pilots Polsinelli Law Firm attorney Marty Harper being told by Judge Silver, Arizona District Court, do not tread on me.
THE COURT: What if I order it as I did before?
MR. HARPER: You know, they have been ordered to do
stuff in the past, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well --
MR. HARPER: And that's the best I can tell you.
THE COURT: Do you want me to call in the United
States Marshals?
THE COURT: What if I order it as I did before?
MR. HARPER: You know, they have been ordered to do
stuff in the past, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well --
MR. HARPER: And that's the best I can tell you.
THE COURT: Do you want me to call in the United
States Marshals?
That would be properly expressed as: Keep denying that the merger EVER happened, not "never happen"....just for "youse" information.
We differ there. It's been more a sad case of them grossly overestimating their own.
MR. HARPER: We're taking the position that they have
a duty to follow through with what they agreed -- ALPA agreed
to and Airways accepted back in 2007 which is the Nicolau.
That is our position, Your Honor. And we think that the union
has the duty to represent us, the minority, and not trump us
because they are the majority and put something else on the
table.
THE COURT: So, then, are you not, then, in violation
of the agreement or the Court's order? I made quite clear --
do I have to read the Court order to you, too, Mr. Harper?
MR. HARPER: I don't think -- I'm sure we're not in
violation because --
THE COURT: Well, I said they do not have to adopt
Nicolau. Okay?
a duty to follow through with what they agreed -- ALPA agreed
to and Airways accepted back in 2007 which is the Nicolau.
That is our position, Your Honor. And we think that the union
has the duty to represent us, the minority, and not trump us
because they are the majority and put something else on the
table.
THE COURT: So, then, are you not, then, in violation
of the agreement or the Court's order? I made quite clear --
do I have to read the Court order to you, too, Mr. Harper?
MR. HARPER: I don't think -- I'm sure we're not in
violation because --
THE COURT: Well, I said they do not have to adopt
Nicolau. Okay?
- Status
