Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[dca319]

They can TRY to sue APA but APA is ONLY responsible for their side of the river in the SLI. Their guys, their data. Not ours. They don't make our argument, USAPA does.

USAPA will be in effect only for the purposes of the SLI issue if if goes that far.

YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUE AND PREVAIL WITH APA.....EVER. EVER.

APA may eventually become the bargaining agent but the SLI they inherit emanates from the MOU and the SLI process therein.

You simply do not understand the legal effects of the MOU.

That's the question that no one knows the answer to - yet. Will AoL sue USAPA when they submit their list or the APA. If USAPA exists only for SLI, then that means the APA has inherited ALL of USAPA's agreements - everything. That puts the APA on the hot seat regarding the Nicolau with the potential for an injunction to stick. That part has the company's attention. The APA and the company would be better served to see the Nicolau used to integrate our side to avoid litigation and an injunction.
For you to talk in your absolutes is naive. Look back at all the absolutes that have been presented to us and tell me how most of them turned out. And I'm not just talking about Bradford and his USAPA promise. We were told the west would crack, the Nicolau would go away, and DOH would be it. The west never cracked, our DOH was ignored, and the Nicolau is still intact with the company still looking for guidance from the court as to what its obligations are. I'm not putting anything out of the realm of possibility.

 

[end_of_alpa]

I recommend everyone read attachment c of the MOU. Before any so called lawsuit becomes ripe, all three of those timelines must be completed.

If you don't read and follow the MOU then you don't know what your talking about.

Again, for anyone to think the Nicolau just disappears because the parties (minus the west class) wrote something that, at best, is ambiguous is being naive.
An arbitrated list doesn't simply disappear and everyone would be smart to keep it in that back of their minds at the very least and keep asking the tough questions. You think the Nicolau is buried so you move on, but what if it isn't buried and shows up later this year? Then what? Do we have a plan? What is our plan B? What is our merger committee going to do if APA's list has it and we go to arbitration? Are we going to stomp our feet and cry foul? Are we going to file an injunction? Do we even have cause for an injunction? Mark these words because I'm telling you I have a feeling that we'll be dealing with that list in a few months.

YOU ARE NOT READING THE MOU. What you're saying is NOT THE WAY IT WORKS.

In short, MTA complete, JCBA complete, SLI complete, then you can sue.

Who can you sue? That's a good question.

 

[cleardirect]

They can TRY to sue APA but APA is ONLY responsible for their side of the river in the SLI. Their guys, their data. Not ours. They don't make our argument, USAPA does.

USAPA will be in effect only for the purposes of the SLI issue if if goes that far.

YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUE AND PREVAIL WITH APA.....EVER. EVER.

APA may eventually become the bargaining agent but the SLI they inherit emanates from the MOU and the SLI process therein.

You simply do not understand the legal effects of the MOU.

The apa will become the bargaining agent and usapa will go away. The liability does not go away. What ever actions usapa takes the APA will inherit.

During the seniority arbitration the APA will be the bargaining agent. Some us airways pilots will be on the merger committee but it is not different than aaa MEC vs AWA MEC. ALPA in this case APA is still responsible for the liability of what the us airways pilots present and argue.

So yes we can sue the APA if the west is not treated fairly or usapa fails to have an LUP and does not use the Nicolau.

Changing your name does not remove liability. Something you east pilots still have not figured out. You can't do harm and walk away.

Otherwise tobacco companies would just change their name or sell the company to someone else and the liability would just disappear. That is not the way it works.

 

[Piedmont1984]

On a slightly different subject, MOU II, para-8,e stipulates minimum widebody positions for us will be 291 captains and 475 F/O's. However this could also be the maximum. There is no longer any linkage to growth on the AA side as there was in MOU I. I'm referring to the 3% and 6% bracketing language which was in the earlier version.

Anyone else read this the same way?

 

[dca319]

I recommend everyone read attachment c of the MOU. Before any so called lawsuit becomes ripe, all three of those timelines must be completed.

JCBA complete, SLI complete, then you can sue.

Who can you sue? That's a good question.

I think it'll go more like this: JCBA complete, lists submitted, then you can sue, SLI complete.

One of us will be proven correct by the end of the year.

 

[end_of_alpa]

The MOU does not have LUP. Usapa has specifically stated that the MOU is neutral on the Nicolau.

Usapa during seniority integration still has to treat the west fairly. Judge silver said that an arbitrated list is fair. A DOH list is not. So anything usapa presents will be compared to the Nicolau. Also usapa has to have a LUP. The MOU does not have one.

I will ask the question to you. You east guys say a list should equally piss off both sides. How does a DOH list piss off the east? It is exactly what you wanted from the start?

By your own definition DOH violates your fairness rule.

What happens if the APA wil only accept the Nicolau list for arbitration? You going to sue the APA? What if the arbitrators decide that that Nicolau list will be used? Going to stomp your feet and cry? Can't pull the majority card this time.

What if the company who has a seat at the table says they don't see a LUP and will only accept the nicoalu list? Because the Nicolau list has all of the required data for integration. It has been accepted by the company.

What has the company's complaint been in court? Rock and shard place. On one side the west will sue if the Nicolau is not used. On the other side usapa will perform a work stoppage. A joint contract completely removes the company fear of a strike. APA will not allow it and without section 6 no possibility of a strike. That leaves only the one problem for the company.

Litigation from the west if they don't use the Nicolau.

Without a strike threat what is the company goi g to argue in court why they can't use the Nicolau? What has Parker said about using the Nicolau? The union has a different view. Well if the new union agrees there is no more dispute.

The east pilot will be in the minority and causing problems that can be ended very quickly. Accept the arbitrated list. Go on to the next arbitration.

Look, I'm not debating you on this any more. You're flat out wrong and there is no legal precepts that support your position.....NONE. In fact, you nor I (nor can AOL, for that matter) can tell USAPA what position they have to take in the SLI. It's USAPA's and that's the point. USAPAs existence is the C&B and that is how OUR list is constructed.

Past that point is anyone's guess.

 

[end_of_alpa]

I think it'll go more like this: JCBA complete, then you can sue, SLI complete.

One of us will be proven correct by the end of the year.

I'll take the bet.

 

[dca319]

On a slightly different subject, MOU II, para-8,e stipulates minimum widebody positions for us will be 291 captains and 475 F/O's. However this could also be the maximum. There is no longer any linkage to growth on the AA side as there was in MOU I. I'm referring to the 3% and 6% bracketing language which was in the earlier version.

Anyone else read this the same way?

What's it matter about a maximum? The MOU is a very short-term document that will be replaced by a JCBA and a combined SLI. Your answer will come from whatever the arbitrators award.

 

[Black Swan]

How about the CLT reps that voted to put the MOU out, but personally don't care for it? Can't they put them out? Surely if the CofC has such value the numbers are readily available in the CLT office and not in the vault. The CofC is one of the main reason I hear for guys voting against this. Are people really comparing the MOU to just some idea of what the CoC is worth to vote against it?

USAirways Pilots East and West, about to take the first offer. They always do. Never do they negotiate from a position of strength. Always they make the case for management. This is about the clearest cut case of management falling over themselves for the prize and payout of their lives. Meanwhile, the pilots on this board are about to sell themselves short. Typical. I would love to be on the other side of a real estate deal or car deal when you guys walk in. I would highball you and you would most likely take it, and make a statement that the dealership was entitled to a large markup.
Why don't you take some time and look at the video of the Pawn Stars. Maybe you can learn something about the art of negotiations. Remember, you are dealing with a company whose CEO has failed numerous times to succeed in a merger. He is in a flat out competition to run the company with Horton. He just booked record profits. And you guys are about to take a substandard offer. Unbelievable. NEVER TAKE THE FIRST OFFER.

 

[end_of_alpa]

The apa will become the bargaining agent and usapa will go away. The liability does not go away. What ever actions usapa takes the APA will inherit.

During the seniority arbitration the APA will be the bargaining agent. Some us airways pilots will be on the merger committee but it is not different than aaa MEC vs AWA MEC. ALPA in this case APA is still responsible for the liability of what the us airways pilots present and argue.

So yes we can sue the APA if the west is not treated fairly or usapa fails to have an LUP and does not use the Nicolau.

Changing your name does not remove liability. Something you east pilots still have not figured out. You can't do harm and walk away.

Otherwise tobacco companies would just change their name or sell the company to someone else and the liability would just disappear. That is not the way it works.

Damn, you're stupid. I give up, you win. HE'S RIGHT EVERYBODY.

YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID!

 

[cleardirect]

I recommend everyone read attachment c of the MOU. Before any so called lawsuit becomes ripe, all three of those timelines must be completed.

If you don't read and follow the MOU then you don't know what your talking about.


YOU ARE NOT READING THE MOU. What you're saying is NOT THE WAY IT WORKS.

In short, MTA complete, JCBA complete, SLI complete, then you can sue.

Who can you sue? That's a good question.

You are funny. Clueless but funny. Timelines are suggestions. There is nothing in there that says they are absolute. Timelines will slip and there is nothing that says an injunction can not be injected at some point.

Your precious timeline also says a joint contract ( ripeness) will be completed prior to seniority arbitration. Nothing to prevent a court case at that point.

 

[cleardirect]

Look, I'm not debating you on this any more. You're flat out wrong and there is no legal precepts that support your position.....NONE. In fact, you nor I (nor can AOL, for that matter) can tell USAPA what position they have to take in the SLI. It's USAPA's and that's the point. USAPAs existence is the C&B and that is how OUR list is constructed.

Past that point is anyone's guess.

The organization that you founder does not listen to the line pilot? Bad karma man.

E courts have already told usapa they have to have a LUP for anything other than e Nicolau. The union APA can tell the us airways division of APA what to present.

The C&BL are a suggestion at best. Not a determining outcome.

 

[cleardirect]

USAirways Pilots East and West, about to take the first offer. They always do. Never do they negotiate from a position of strength. Always they make the case for management. This is about the clearest cut case of management falling over themselves for the prize and payout of their lives. Meanwhile, the pilots on this board are about to sell themselves short. Typical. I would love to be on the other side of a real estate deal or car deal when you guys walk in. I would highball you and you would most likely take it, and make a statement that the dealership was entitled to a large markup.
Why don't you take some time and look at the video of the Pawn Stars. Maybe you can learn something about the art of negotiations. Remember, you are dealing with a company whose CEO has failed numerous times to succeed in a merger. He is in a flat out competition to run the company with Horton. He just booked record profits. And you guys are about to take a substandard offer. Unbelievable. NEVER TAKE THE FIRST OFFER.

Ummmm. You do understand that this MOU II? This is not the first offer.

Besides the CLT reps are saying they saved us all by getting a better deal. Are you saying the CLT reps failed and should be recalled?

 

[cactusboy53]

Nic4us,

We have sparred on things. We have agreed on things. But let me assure you of one thing. I know gunter better than you do. We have flown together. We have discussed things together. I can assure you of one thing. He is not an idiot and I would place anything he has to say ahead of you. You would be wise to STFU and listen.

Most of you aren't idiots. You are empassioned about your desire to evade a final and binding arbitration and squash the PHX based pilots by any means possible (RICO, Address-Gate, etc.). You guys have argued & quoted portions of legal findings that seem to support your case. That's all.

We conversely seek to legally force you into the acceptance of that same legal, final & binding seniority list.

Carry on.

 

[end_of_alpa]

You are funny. Clueless but funny. Timelines are suggestions. There is nothing in there that says they are absolute. Timelines will slip and there is nothing that says an injunction can not be injected at some point.

Your precious timeline also says a joint contract ( ripeness) will be completed prior to seniority arbitration. Nothing to prevent a court case at that point.

Timelines are a MAXIMUM under the MOU. They ARE absolute.

Youcan ASK for an injunction, but based on Judge Silvers judgment, I would say it would be very long odds indeed if it were granted.

Why? Because if the majority vote (an here is the key here) for the MOU, the Statute (McCaskill-Bond) overtakes the jurisdiction of the court. Pat is right about the MOU being neutral on what USAPA OR APA will argue. Each side will argue the merits of THEIR integration methods. But if the majority votes for it, you have to abide by it, like it or not.