Feb / Mar 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Walmartgreeter]

I wouldn't say irrelevant. When ripeness does occur all that legwork will be submitted for the trial. As you know, it won on merit and lost on a technicality.

Legwork from what process? I will dig through my documents, I doubt any evidence from the defunct Wake trial will go anywhere. When ripeness occurs on the combined seniority list, the DFR will refer to the member ratified MOU process, not LOA 96. There will be no arguments on the legitimacy of USAPA or its actions prior to the merger with AMR. I can hear Marty now "you see, there were these guys in a van back in 2007...."

Greeter

 

[snapthis]

Anyone want to post that letter from Jones?

Is there something new from Legal Affairs?

 

[Claxon]

Exactly.
Also, when they went from ALPA to USAPA, did LOA 93 go away?

Probably the dumbest argument ever. Are you that stupid that you think this event nullifies a negotiated letter?

 

[Claxon]

Legwork from what process? I will dig through my documents, I doubt any evidence from the defunct Wake trial will go anywhere. When ripeness occurs on the combined seniority list, the DFR will refer to the member ratified MOU process, not LOA 96. There will be no arguments on the legitimacy of USAPA or its actions prior to the merger with AMR. I can hear Marty now "you see, there were these guys in a van back in 2007...."

Greeter

Marty is absolutely brilliant at fleecing a group of seniority thieves.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Marty is absolutely brilliant at fleecing a group of seniority thieves.

They are not thieves yet. My seniority is still intact!

Greeter

 

[cleardirect]

Addington is irrelevant. Ruled that the trial should never have taken place, due to ripeness. Therefore, any findings are also irrelevant as they also should have never occurred.

Keep banging that drum. better check with your own lawyer. He just referenced the Addingoton in his latest filing. It did happen, there is a record. The facts and evidence are still valid.

Ripeness changes, the facts don't.

 

[nevergiveup]

The MOU does not say 2 lists....man you guys cannot even read....this is like the third time...the MOU says "lists in effect"...not 2 lists. The Nic is in effect.

Your premise is that the Nic required ratification. An absurd idea, not found in the TA.

A JCBA required ratification. It also required using the Nic. But, the failure to ratify a JCBA is not grounds to nullify the Nic, only proves uscaba is an incompetent fake union.

Why do you pay dues to a fake union? "In effect.".....might I suggest a dictionary?

 

[cleardirect]

Not a conspiracy theory at all, I rarely believe in those. Where did I say that? Assuming again.

Go ahead, I asked you first. Step up and actually answer me for once. You usually tuck your tail and run from my questions.

What do I think the purpose of the company's letter to the NMB was?

To let the NMB exactly who is to blame for the delay. Read through the letter. The company is telling the NMB that it is usapa being unreasonable and refuses to put an end to the seniority issue. The company offered two options. Willingly go to court and allow a judge to settle this or get a contract and settle seniority later. Usapa (east pilots) are refusing both options. The option usapa is demanding puts the company square in a law suit and liability. That option also puts the work of the NMB and the negotiators at risk of being overturned. No one likes to waste their time when all but one party understands the result.

This letter also lays out the option for usapa members if the BPR had released the letter. Two options. Settle seniority once and for all or never get a contract. The company said the west is willing to let a court decide. Usapa refuses. Usapa has delayed and used procedural tricks (ripeness) to avoid an answer. Why would usapa do that? Because they know the answer and a delay gains east pilots the most.

Eventually this letter was going to come out and the east pilots would see that they could have had a contract if the usapa leadership has done the responsible thing.

The company is also making a record that they do not want to get sued. So when the Nicolau does go into place they can point to this letter and the court filings and tell usapa too bad just protecting the corporation. Anywhere in that letter do you see where the company is afraid of the east pilots or usapa if they don’t use DOH? I see a lot of references to law suit from the west.

This letter is about telling the NMB that the company is done dealing with the childish antics of usapa. This is big boy rules and usapa needs to make a decision. Accept your responsibility or sit in the corner forever without a contract. Again what did the NMB do? This letter is discoverable in a DFR. The company is avoiding liability and placing it all on usapa. This letter could also be used by east pilots to sue usapa for failure to perform their required duty to negotiate a contract and improve working condition and pay rates.

Did that answer your question?

Now why do you think the company wrote the letter?

 

[Walmartgreeter]

What do I think the purpose of the company's letter to the NMB was?

To let the NMB exactly who is to blame for the delay. Read through the letter. The company is telling the NMB that it is usapa being unreasonable and refuses to put an end to the seniority issue. The company offered two options. Willingly go to court and allow a judge to settle this or get a contract and settle seniority later. Usapa (east pilots) are refusing both options. The option usapa is demanding puts the company square in a law suit and liability. That option also puts the work of the NMB and the negotiators at risk of being overturned. No one likes to waste their time when all but one party understands the result.

This letter also lays out the option for usapa members if the BPR had released the letter. Two options. Settle seniority once and for all or never get a contract. The company said the west is willing to let a court decide. Usapa refuses. Usapa has delayed and used procedural tricks (ripeness) to avoid an answer. Why would usapa do that? Because they know the answer and a delay gains east pilots the most.

Eventually this letter was going to come out and the east pilots would see that they could have had a contract if the usapa leadership has done the responsible thing.

The company is also making a record that they do not want to get sued. So when the Nicolau does go into place they can point to this letter and the court filings and tell usapa too bad just protecting the corporation. Anywhere in that letter do you see where the company is afraid of the east pilots or usapa if they don’t use DOH? I see a lot of references to law suit from the west.

This letter is about telling the NMB that the company is done dealing with the childish antics of usapa. This is big boy rules and usapa needs to make a decision. Accept your responsibility or sit in the corner forever without a contract. Again what did the NMB do? This letter is discoverable in a DFR. The company is avoiding liability and placing it all on usapa. This letter could also be used by east pilots to sue usapa for failure to perform their required duty to negotiate a contract and improve working condition and pay rates.

Did that answer your question?

Now why do you think the company wrote the letter?

Who cares why the Company wrote the letter. That was then... They act in their own best interest, not yours or mine. What else should we expect? What the Company is soon to do in regard to this matter will surprise you. They really, really are neutral, and ready to move on. The language in the MOU (game changer) made them very, very happy. Thank you for ratifying it. Parker, USAPA, APA..all moving on. Feel free to grab on to the last car in train, if you can.

Greeter

 

[prechilill]

Listen up westies:
When YOU ratified the MOU, you agreed to abandon your current working agreements.
You also agreed to abide by the AA contract at the effective date.
Is this so hard to understand?
Everything in the past, stays in the past. The new future is AA+MOU=MTA, then a new J/C.
All the previous agreements are gone.
You voted for it, and it passed with flying colors.
Can't go back and rewrite the rules now, it's done.
Cheers.

Thank you for pointing out the west's case is now ripe. You're finally catching on. See you in court.

 

[prechilill]

Who cares why the Company wrote the letter. That was then... They act in their own best interest, not yours or mine. What else should we expect? What the Company is soon to do in regard to this matter will surprise you. They really, really are neutral, and ready to move on. The language in the MOU (game changer) made them very, very happy. Thank you for ratifying it. Parker, USAPA, APA..all moving on. Feel free to grab on to the last car in train, if you can.

Greeter

Einstein, show me where in the MOU it says USAPA can ignore the Nicolau list and replace it with a DOH list between east and west. Please, just the page number will suffice.

 

[snapthis]

Thank you for pointing out the west's case is now ripe. You're finally catching on. See you in court.

You got that right. The company is interested in getting on with the merger. They could care less about a toothless association. We'll handle the paper tiger.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Einstein, show me where in the MOU it says USAPA can ignore the Nicolau list and replace it with a DOH list between east and west. Please, just the page number will suffice.

Sorry, I cannot. The MOU says nothing about replacing anything, or the makeup of the final result. It only speaks to a new process. Are you in?

Greeter

 

[prechilill]

You got that right. The company is interested in getting on with the merger. They could care less about a toothless association. We'll handle the paper tiger.

Greeter said basically the same thing, the company could care less- it's all about the merger going forward at this point. Funny, the east pilots cannot even understand what they are thinking... AFO logic, I presume.

 

[prechilill]

Sorry, I cannot. The MOU says nothing about replacing anything, or the makeup of the final result. It only speaks to a new process. Are you in?

Greeter

So the Nic isn't dead after all, you say...