August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[Reed Richards]

How did it go day 2?

Based on what I saw, Dean Colello is the cure for insomnia, Bob Davidson left his dentures at the hotel, Jess Pauly needs to listen to the question before answering and James Ray should not play with his device in court.

Speaks to just how poorly Marty did, if you are having to resort to making fun of individuals’ appearances. Now tell us how little we are paid, and make fun of accidents. The RR Theorem is all but proven. The Nic is gone and the West Class has accepted that fact and moved on, moved on to nothing of real substance but petty taunts and lie detector fodder for Rez. RR

 

[Pi brat]

How did it go day 2?

Based on what I saw, Dean Colello is the cure for insomnia, Bob Davidson left his dentures at the hotel, Jess Pauly needs to listen to the question before answering and James Ray should not play with his device in court.

All of those are clear evidence of USAPA's failure of it's DFR. Hang 'em!

I really don't get the mood. You guys have obviously won a great victory. Any day now the DOJ will settle with the company, you will get your back pay, then Judge Silver will rule in your favor and measure out her punishment. And that punishment is obvious. Immediate implementation of Res Jude's Nicolau plus. That is the Nicolau minus the top 517 going east, immediate bump and flush bid so that res goes from reserve AB F/O to take 924PS' A330 captain bid. And best of all-a gazillion dollars in damages!

 

[snapthis]

Speaks to just how poorly Marty did, if you are having to resort to making fun of individuals’ appearances. Now tell us how little we are paid, and make fun of accidents. The RR Theorem is all but proven. The Nic is gone and the West Class has accepted that fact and moved on, moved on to nothing of real substance but petty taunts and lie detector fodder for Rez. RR

Where do you get your info, an 8-ball?

The Usapian deception was unmasked in court. Cheerleaders like yourself ignore the score. I'm glad those weren't my reps on the stand. I know you miss Lee now.

Embarrassing display and you only have yourselves to blame.

That's my theorem.

 

[snapthis]

All of those are clear evidence of USAPA's failure of it's DFR. Hang 'em!

I really don't get the mood. You guys have obviously won a great victory. Any day now the DOJ will settle with the company, you will get your back pay, then Judge Silver will rule in your favor and measure out her punishment. And that punishment is obvious. Immediate implementation of Res Jude's Nicolau plus. That is the Nicolau minus the top 517 going east, immediate bump and flush bid so that res goes from reserve AB F/O to take 924PS' A330 captain bid. And best of all-a gazillion dollars in damages!

.........;

 

[Reed Richards]

All of those are clear evidence of USAPA's failure of it's DFR. Hang 'em!

I really don't get the mood. You guys have obviously won a great victory. Any day now the DOJ will settle with the company, you will get your back pay, then Judge Silver will rule in your favor and measure out her punishment. And that punishment is obvious. Immediate implementation of Res Jude's Nicolau plus. That is the Nicolau minus the top 517 going east, immediate bump and flush bid so that res goes from reserve AB F/O to take 924PS' A330 captain bid. And best of all-a gazillion dollars in damages!

Yep. Ponder this, were the West to somehow get "status" at the table, they would be bringing not a single WB to the game, and only 1 marginal hub. They cannot have it both ways, they are either with us or separate. You can be sure APA and USAPA would just love to join forces and argue for a WB fence locking out PHX. No WBs, marginal and shrinking hub, a trickle of attrition. That single issue might unite the East and APA to come up with a completed list for arbitration, with proper fences and restrictions. Of course the West Class would be in there trying to use the NIC. 90% of the pilots come to agreement, 10% want the NIC and all its associated failure. How does that turn out? RR

 

[Pi brat]

Where do you get your info, an 8-ball?

The Usapian deception was unmasked in court.

Can you really say that with a straigh face? If so, you are deceiving yourself. It was clear to anyone with an IQ above 50 that the MOU did not call for the use of the Nicolau award, if they actually read it and didn't just do what AOL told them to do.

The only deception comes from AOL having one of it's leaders, Ken Holmes, on the NAC where he was a party to the MOU, told his members to vote for it with the intention of suing after it passed for what wasn't in there!

 

[Black Swan]

Where do you get your info, an 8-ball?

The Usapian deception was unmasked in court. Cheerleaders like yourself ignore the score. I'm glad those weren't my reps on the stand. I know you miss Lee now.

Embarrassing display and you only have yourselves to blame.

That's my theorem.

Nothing was "unmasked". The bottom line, despite what any and all of you postulate, is this: the installation of USAPA was totally legal and done under the auspices of the NMB.
As the Nicolau was not incorporated in a JCBA, USAPA was not required to use it. This has been proved by the fact it has not been implemented.
There may or may not be harm for the West after a JCBA. We shall see. Raises and a stable company do not constitute harm in the airline world.
The West pilots are members of USAPA and will not get separate status. No more than the DCA or PHL or CLT pilots deserve. The PHX base has more members on the NAC than any other domicile. They recommended the MOU be accepted.
As much as you claim, Judge Silver cannot grant separate class to the West pilots, nor impose the Nicolau. She cannot tell a labor association how to order a seniority proposal, whatever it finally proposes. That same union will have to abide by legislation already in effect.
This DFR 2 is an exercise in futility for the West. There is NO JCBA, therefore, no harm.

 

[nevergiveup]

If APA wants the NIC, then they will probably get it. I bet they want it, bad!

 

[Phoenix]

Yep. Ponder this, were the West to somehow get "status" at the table, they would be bringing not a single WB to the game, and only 1 marginal hub. They cannot have it both ways, they are either with us or separate. You can be sure APA and USAPA would just love to join forces and argue for a WB fence locking out PHX. No WBs, marginal and shrinking hub, a trickle of attrition. That single issue might unite the East and APA to come up with a completed list for arbitration, with proper fences and restrictions. Of course the West Class would be in there trying to use the NIC. 90% of the pilots come to agreement, 10% want the NIC and all its associated failure. How does that turn out? RR

You are are appealing to what they want... As they do all the time to us... Ergo we both admit that the issue is up for negotiations, as was done to reach an MOU.

The issue at court isn't about negotiating or appealing to either side what each wants.. It's about a DFR and there is reason to think Judge Silver is hell bent on inventing her own standard of DFR, of which the SCOTUS knows nothing.

Silver seems hell bent on the notion that USAPA would be in DFR if they are not in compliance with her order to consider the Nic... From page 240 of day 1

THE COURT: What you're saying is that that indicates
an intent by USAPA through Mr. Szymanski that there was no
intent to, in any way, comply with the Court's order that
required that they go to the bargaining table [for the MOU] with at least a
consideration of the Nicolau agreement. Is that what you're
saying that I have to draw from all of this?....now, that is where we start.
What do we have?

And then Silver lets Marty talk to that premise for FIVE pages.

 

[Pi brat]

Okay Koontz, are you still trolling this board? If so, how can you claim that the MOU is just like the Kirby proposal, where the SLI is dropped in? The Kirby proposal didn't have language specifying no changing of the current seniority lists in effect like the MOU does. Geez. And under oath.

"Q. And so when they told you the MOU II was seniority
neutral, your reaction was?
A. It makes sense, just like the Kirby. "

 

[Pi brat]

n
“Q. The Nicolau Award has not been implemented since it was 09:56:03
announced by George Nicolau in '07; correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Has that had any economic impact on you, Mr. Koontz?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you explain to the Court how?
A. Well, based upon the integration method that Mr. Nick --
Arbitrator Nicolau proffered, my position on the combined list
would be such that I would most likely not be a First Officer
anymore. I would be a captain on a narrow-body airplane and
the impact is on the order of a 50 percent increase in pay and
benefits.
MR. HARPER: I have no further questions, Your Honor.”

How times change


“Mark my words, this will go exactly like Pan-Am/National. Why? Because the merger is almost a dead-ringer. Because the "unfairness" arguments from the Pan-Am/National merger have already been argued in federal court following the merger and all challenges lost. That means there is already precedent for this sort of integration. It's the safest way out for the arbitrator, the unions (national leadership, of course) and the two airlines. And that's what everyone wants; just dispose of it as soon as possible. Anybody expecting something other than a ratio based on longevity will be disappointed.

But the PanAm-National merger directly applies. And that was straight longevity for the top part of the seniority lists, and then dovetailing for the rest. That's the scenario you outlined above. It's been done before and will be done again.

As for slotting, don't assume it would be one for one or tailed in such a way that the bottom flying UAir guy is paired with the bottom AWA guy. There will be some sort of slotting but consideration will be given to age and longevity as well. I expect the number one UAIR guy on furlough won't be much worse off than the bottom UAIR pilot flying. If he were markedly worse off solely because of his "furlough" status, then we're getting away from fairness and into pure arbitrariness in dictating peoples' lives and careers. The number one guy on furlough all of a sudden falls way behind the bottom flying guy, just ahead of him. Not cool. Make your arguments and let the chips fall where they may. It'll be a subjective, gut instinct decision on the part of the arbitrator, but that is just the way it is and is the best way for all.


But I doubt the furloughees with 15 years of longevity will go to the bottom. My guess on the ultimate integration will be to integrate using a weighted longevity formula. Somebody with fifteen years at U that's now on the street is likely to integrate somewhere around senior AWA f/o or perhaps very junior captain. But that's just a guess.”

 

[Piedmont1984]

I assume the NMB (not the NLRB) has an obligation to protect the RLA from misinterpretation, misapplication, or willful disregard on the part of any 'activist' judge. If Judge Silver falls into this category when and if she rules in favor of the Addington plaintiffs, do the RLA attorneys parachute in at that time? Do they have an interest in becoming involved unsolicited? Is there a precedent for soliciting their assistance and/or intervention? Has USAPA done so? Is anyone at the NMB monitoring this lawsuit? Is anyone at USAPA monitoring the NMB while they are monitoring us?

Being just a line pilot with no legal training, I admit to being under informed on this issue and lack an answer to these questions.

'84

 

[Phoenix]

I assume the NMB (not the NLRB) has an obligation to protect the RLA from misinterpretation, misapplication, or willful disregard on the part of any 'activist' judge....

I find it disappointing that we are in front of a judge and we have doubt that she will uphold the law. The NMB didn't write the RLA and thus are not the legal authority for it. The RLA is the RLA, regardless of who points it out. In other words, if she disregards the RLA, she is ignoring Congress not USAPA.

Silver seems more enamored with her own "order" for USAPA to consider the Nic in negotiations, than she does with the RLA or the SCOTUS standard of DFR.

In the closing motion of day one, Symanski made a big mistake by playing into SIlver's misapplication of law. He moved to have the judge rule that the plaintiff failed to establish a breach of DFR (which was good), but when asked "On what basis?" by Siver, he, IMHO, made a mistake by responding on the premise that USAPA had to prove USAPA did good things. USAPA is not the plaintiff and has no burden of proof. He began to try to justify why USAPA did good things which plays into her "LUP" nonsense... i.e. he should have stuck with THEY DID NOT ESTABLISH A BREACH OF DFR. The SCOTUS standard of DFR is such and such and THEY DID NOT ESTABLISH USAPA ACTED OUTSIDE OF THAT STANDARD.

Soon after that the COURT helps out the Plaintiff. Silver said, "It has NOT come through to me unequivocally that the company demanded 10h as a condition to complete the MOU" (paraphrased)... which sets up the notion that USAPA is alone in negotiating that... then she moves on further past any SCOTUS standard of DFR or the RLA and repeats her oft dubious "order" that required USAPA to consider the Nic in their negotiations.. and to be clear she has said several times that she made such an order (though she never signed and published such an order). On several occasions she made clear that because of the 9th she cannot go back before her "order", but she claims she can go forward after her "order" and analyze whatever USAPA does after her "order".

In her logic, USAPA can be guilty of a DFR for failure to consider the Nic in MOU negotiations (a violation of her "order" not of SCOTUS DFR standards), and on that premise she could find USAPA guilty of DFR by putting the MOU out for a vote, before the West voted to accept it. (That would make the West vote moot as a defense).

Ergo she can now find USAPA Guilty, Order no injunction to use the Nic, and Order West class present at the MB to ensure the Nic is still considered.

Does she have what it takes to publish such an ORDER on Court Letter Head, with her signature on it? She didn't do so for her "order" to consider the Nic....

 

[Res Judicata]

I find it disappointing that we are in front of a judge and we have doubt that she will uphold the law. The NMB didn't write the RLA and thus are not the legal authority for it. The RLA is the RLA, regardless of who points it out. In other words, if she disregards the RLA, she is ignoring Congress not USAPA.

Silver seems more enamored with her own "order" for USAPA to consider the Nic in negotiations, than she does with the RLA or the SCOTUS standard of DFR.

In the closing motion of day one, Symanski made a big mistake by playing into SIlver's misapplication of law. He moved to have the judge rule that the plaintiff failed to establish a breach of DFR (which was good), but when asked "On what basis?" by Siver, he, IMHO, made a mistake by responding on the premise that USAPA had to prove USAPA did good things. USAPA is not the plaintiff and has no burden of proof. He began to try to justify why USAPA did good things which plays into her "LUP" nonsense... i.e. he should have stuck with THEY DID NOT ESTABLISH A BREACH OF DFR. The SCOTUS standard of DFR is such and such and THEY DID NOT ESTABLISH USAPA ACTED OUTSIDE OF THAT STANDARD.

Soon after that the COURT helps out the Plaintiff. Silver said, "It has NOT come through to me unequivocally that the company demanded 10h as a condition to complete the MOU" (paraphrased)... which sets up the notion that USAPA is alone in negotiating that... then she moves on further past any SCOTUS standard of DFR or the RLA and repeats her oft dubious "order" that required USAPA to consider the Nic in their negotiations.. and to be clear she has said several times that she made such an order (though she never signed and published such an order). On several occasions she made clear that because of the 9th she cannot go back before her "order", but she claims she can go forward after her "order" and analyze whatever USAPA does after her "order".

In her logic, USAPA can be guilty of a DFR for failure to consider the Nic in MOU negotiations (a violation of her "order" not of SCOTUS DFR standards), and on that premise she could find USAPA guilty of DFR by putting the MOU out for a vote, before the West voted to accept it. (That would make the West vote moot as a defense).

Ergo she can now find USAPA Guilty, Order no injunction to use the Nic, and Order West class present at the MB to ensure the Nic is still considered.

Does she have what it takes to publish such an ORDER on Court Letter Head, with her signature on it? She didn't do so for her "order" to consider the Nic....

BLAH, blah, blah...poor USCABA...nobody understands...nobody gets it...America sucks

 

[EastUS1]

BLAH, blah, blah...poor USCABA...nobody understands...nobody gets it...America sucks

"Sleep it off Res. You'll at least "feel" smarter in the morning, I'm sure...."Dude".

My faith in humanity is again refreshed.