Feb / Mar 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
- Status
flyboeing737
Member
- Joined
- May 6, 2007
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 32
NIC is the only fair solution.
GuntherA320
Senior
You think the Flight Attendants should combine via the NIC??? I don't think they agreed to that. Unless Greeter is mistaken, I think he's saying they merged by DOH with conditions and restrictions.
cleardirect
Veteran
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 6,234
- Reaction score
- 9,749
Which paragraph in the MOU establishes a mechanism of oversight to bind USAPA to an independently approved LUP prior to the JCBA? Oh yeah that would be in the figment paragraph.
Federal judge paragraph. Judge Silver. As much as you try usapa does not trump federal rules.
Read the jones letter to the NMB. That is the problem, no independent review. The company has to decide, negotiate a contract including seniority then go to court to determine if it is legitimate.
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,146
- Reaction score
- 3,236
nycbusdriver
Veteran
Who cares about what some lawyer (yours, ours, or theirs) has to say in a letter? It's opinion, and slanted at that. He's entitled to his point of view, but it's not the end of anything.
nycbusdriver
Veteran
The west flight attendants tried unsuccessfully to get the AFA to change their merger rules so they could be slotted with the east.
Must be something in the water out there.
Res Judicata
Veteran
Yeah. The jury heard all about that crap. They #### slapped your fake union shortly thereafter.
A320 Driver
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Messages
- 3,358
- Reaction score
- 2,319
From the West perspective...
A320 Driver
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Messages
- 3,358
- Reaction score
- 2,319
No they didn't... Wake suppressed most of the testimony regarding the construction and particulars of the NIC. The jury never heard that part of it. They DID hear Wake discussing damages prior to a verdict being rendered. The 9th should have slapped him good over that, but it wasn't necessary to have the whole thing thrown out.
Serious question. i make that distinction because I hammer your posts so much. Does the Jones letter have any relevance today? Doesn't the MOU supersede that whole path we were on before? AOL mentions that change in it's recent update.
And you refer to Silver and her ruling. Well, she upheld YOUR argument that the Nic lived in the TA and the USAPA inherited it. Well, the TA is put to pasture. Does that not change things?
Do you think that every legal decision that is handed down is clearly and truly based on correct rule of law? That innocent people never lose and guilty never win? If so, why do we need appeals courts. Why has this gone on so long?
You forget that I have said that I see your side of things. That if you put two people in a room to make a decision without any knowledge of the RLA and labor law they may stop at "you agreed to the process...." and side with you. But, that isn't the way it works and it is not how it turned out.
Both of our attorneys advised us to vote for the the MOU. They know what their clients want, so I see just a few reasons for their recommendations;
-The AOL attorneys got it wrong
-USAPA attorneys got it wrong
-One side's attorneys know they got it wrong but want to keep squeezing the golden goose
- The Hummel haters were right, he knows we can't win, and they put this language in the MOU to get the east to vote for it and will later say "Sorry, we did the best we could, let's move on!"
I don't know which it is. Maybe there is another reason, but I know you guys didn't vote for the MOU by 97% thinking it killed the NIC. I just question a lot of what the west puts out and some of what the east does. You will see me ask more about your positions because I really don't care for you and your manner. But here is one thing I don't see about a popular east opinion-If the Nic is gone because it was never used and the MOU supersedes it, doesn't that also mean that the DOH list presented to the company is gone?
cactusboy53
Veteran
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 2,649
- Reaction score
- 7,407
G;
AFA merged lists according to AFA law (DOH) as stated PRIOR to the merger of AWA & AAA.
We did seniority integration according to our collective bargaining agent's merger policy. Then the majority deems the result of that process as "unfair", and thus created USAPA for the purpose of evading the Nicolau seniority list (re Bradford letter). This all AFTER the fact of a merged seniority list.
The end of this nonsense is very near. Logically, legally, ethically ...which way do you think it will go??
CB
nycbusdriver
Veteran
I think it does. Didn't Parker and Kirby allude to, if not say flat out, that this merger is giving US Airways an opportunity to clean the slate in regards to the pilot wars?
Piedmont1984
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Messages
- 1,737
- Reaction score
- 897
I think the MOU puts everything back in play and simultaneously places everything at risk regarding the SLI. It is no doubt a re-do, to the chagrin of the west. At the same time it nixes DOH. We could end up with something resembling DOH or a reasonable facsimile of the Nic, or something in between.
The process carries undeniable risk - but I like it.
The process carries undeniable risk - but I like it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
