Feb / Mar 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Pi brat]

On the flip side, a trap may been set for Leonidas but I think that's been taken care of.

If so I would be worried if I were you. A major figure in AOL was on the committee that produced it. Your attorneys had ample time to study it. They obviously advised you to vote for it.

How is it taken care of? We don't have a final answer on MOU 1 after 2 years!

 

[Pi brat]

It us airways was so profitable why were you in BK twice in a short amount of time?

So you think that a single executive was all the east was lacking to survive?

If so why all the hate towards Parker? You guys should be kissing his ass not calling him names. If Parker could have saved you why was AWA going to go away since we had wonder boy?

It wasn't profitable then, but Parker has said over and over that it is the most profitable now.

Things change. Some of the very reasons that the west model no longer worked helped the east side. The main thing is that we got our costs to your level. And the merger made structural changes that made the east system work better. The same type things that will strengthen the new AA.

 

[Black Swan]

Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the
parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the
CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s
seniority proposal — whatever USAPA’s final proposal ultimately
is. Because these contingencies make the claim speculative,
the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.

 

[A320 Driver]

If the company was going to put 190 flying out west why have they waited 6 years to do it? Why did the company deny the grievance to award the west the 1/3 of the 190's that we are owed?

No the 190 is not coming to PHX.

I was referring to potential flying going forward to replace contracts we have with regionals. I imagine the company will put that flying wherever they need it...including PHX.

 

[Black Swan]

If the company was going to put 190 flying out west why have they waited 6 years to do it? Why did the company deny the grievance to award the west the 1/3 of the 190's that we are owed?

No the 190 is not coming to PHX.

I've got your latest filing figured Clear. The light came on very clearly. You guys have been trying to get the AA pilots and mangagement spooked about the Nic, and threatening them with actionable litigation. You have been ramping the rhetoric with the APA, AMR, LCC and USAPA. The intent was to try and spook one of them into biting on the Nic, and the implied "accept the Nic, and no litigation..." we heard that from you, and Nic4, and it is embedded in Leonidas information over and over. Obviously you two are involved at the higher levels of Leonidas, or let the tactic out of the bag. I think the former. That tactic did not work. Now Harper is trying the next level of intimidation for all parties, the filing. Trouble is, everyone has a pretty clear understanding of the 9ths ruling, and the fact this deal is still not ripe. You know it, they know it. My question is do you actually go all the way to court, or does Harper and Leonidas back down at the doorstep of the initial legal wrangling. and save the cash for the only venue you really have- the possibility of harm after the Nic is not used?
You know you don't have a ripe issue. Just wondering how far you push this thing? I know the company is on to the ripeness. So is USAPA. I really don't think APA could honestly care about it. Even if they did, what could they do, and why would they?
What do you think Clear?

 

[nycbusdriver]

SYICMF!! Bring your water wings, you're going down for good this time.

Yawn

 

[Black Swan]

Hey Clear, the company is definitely on to you. That is why they put out the EAST BID immediately after the MOU passed. They jammed it to you and made it perfectly clear they still recognize separate ops and the MOU was NOT a JCBA. They were on to your tactic immediately and set their flag on separate ops. They want to keep you guys separate for any number of reasons. It just makes sense until they don't need the option.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Who cares now. The past is the past, and you are going to lose your case and spend your pilots money for another unripe case. That, is fact.
Cite one reason the latest filing is novel and meets the 9ths criteria.

Their losses to their attorney and to the court system will be minimal compared to Addison. No federal district judge in his/her right mind will even consider hearing the case in light of the Ninths ruling on Addison. It will be dismissed quickly.

 

[Portly Dorman]

Thanks Billy. We on the west have a personal trade board. We trade amongst ourselves. Someone drops time I can pick it up. No harm no foul. I guess helping a fellow pilot out with a trip trade or pick up a turn or day or two so he can have personal time for his interests.

You selfish SOB. You have folks furloughed and you're flying over your minimum? What a useless piece of crap you are. No, a better word is SCAB!

 

[Bill Brasky]

Thanks Billy. We on the west have a personal trade board. We trade amongst ourselves. Someone drops time I can pick it up. No harm no foul. I guess helping a fellow pilot out with a trip trade or pick up a turn or day or two so he can have personal time for his interests.

No harm no foul to YOU, you selfish POS. There are furloughed guys that would be called back if you guys only flew what you were obilgated to.

I know. It's all about YOU. No harm, no foul my ass. You westies are just selfish aholes. You've already proven that, all over the world.

 

[Portly Dorman]

Allowing employed pilots to be furloughed ok?

Not honoring binding arbitration ok?

Not giving DOH to returning furloughs ok? and its your gold standard too...

No harm no foul to YOU, you selfish POS. There are furloughed guys that would be called back if you guys only flew what you were obilgated to.

I know. It's all about YOU. No harm, no foul my ass. You westies are just selfish aholes. You've already proven that, all over the world.

 

[Metroyet]

I've got your latest filing figured Clear. The light came on very clearly. You guys have been trying to get the AA pilots and mangagement spooked about the Nic, and threatening them with actionable litigation. You have been ramping the rhetoric with the APA, AMR, LCC and USAPA. The intent was to try and spook one of them into biting on the Nic, and the implied "accept the Nic, and no litigation..." we heard that from you, and Nic4, and it is embedded in Leonidas information over and over. Obviously you two are involved at the higher levels of Leonidas, or let the tactic out of the bag. I think the former. That tactic did not work. Now Harper is trying the next level of intimidation for all parties, the filing. Trouble is, everyone has a pretty clear understanding of the 9ths ruling, and the fact this deal is still not ripe. You know it, they know it. My question is do you actually go all the way to court, or does Harper and Leonidas back down at the doorstep of the initial legal wrangling. and save the cash for the only venue you really have- the possibility of harm after the Nic is not used?
You know you don't have a ripe issue. Just wondering how far you push this thing? I know the company is on to the ripeness. So is USAPA. I really don't think APA could honestly care about it. Even if they did, what could they do, and why would they?
What do you think Clear?

The company is neutral and the hobsons choice...which was always a bs excuse to keep you idiots in poverty, is now gone. You're under one contract, and you now have one last chance at trying to come up with a LUP that won't get laughed out of court...which WE ALL KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE.

 

[snapthis]

Allowing employed pilots to be furloughed ok?

Not honoring binding arbitration ok?

Not giving DOH to returning furloughs ok? and its your gold standard too...

He's all ticked off he did not make the cut at HP and Karen was a much was a much better pick.

 

[Black Swan]

The company is neutral and the hobsons choice...which was always a bs excuse to keep you idiots in poverty, is now gone. You're under one contract, and you now have one last chance at trying to come up with a LUP that won't get laughed out of court...which WE ALL KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE.

I forgot, and thanks for reminding me. The LUP issue, or the issue you have manufactured. USAPA clearly has a LUP. You just don't happen to agree with it. That is the other thrust of Leonidas. The LUP argument. It is just like ripeness. You don't have it.
I am just going to sit back and watch how far Leonidas pushes themselves closer to court, knowing they are going down the same trail as Addington. Hoping someone gets spooked by an issue that is just a charade. Just how far do you go until you get snared in the same dilemma? This will be interesting.
By the way, the company is NOT neutral. They are not taking your Nic. They can't. And they just put out an East bid to prove the MOU is not a JCBA.

 

[Metroyet]

I forgot, and thanks for reminding me. The LUP issue, or the issue you have manufactured. USAPA clearly has a LUP. You just don't happen to agree with it. That is the other thrust of Leonidas. The LUP argument. It is just like ripeness. You don't have it.
I am just going to sit back and watch how far Leonidas pushes themselves closer to court, knowing they are going down the same trail as Addington. Hoping someone gets spooked by an issue that is just a charade. Just how far do you go until you get snared in the same dilemma? This will be interesting.
By the way, the company is NOT neutral. They are not taking your Nic. They can't. And they just put out an East bid to prove the MOU is not a JCBA.

What is the LUP? Who manufactured that requirement?