Larry Pike of 567 FIRED ?

[Vortilon]

The numbers come from DOT F41. It's what all airlines use to report their data. The HC numbers do contain everyone that works in aircraft maintenance which will include AMTs, Cleaners, Facilities, and Auto Mechanics (M&R). While not entirely accurate to the head and exact job description they are a very good indicator of HC per aircraft. That being said even if there is some error, and I assume there is some, it still doesn't explain the decline in HC per aircraft at WN since 1999 to present. Either you are doing the same work with less people, the airplanes you have require less maintenance, and/or work stayed the same and more is outsourced. I believe it is a combination of both. I know you switched to a MSG3 program in the past ten years and most have and that probably accounts for some of the reduction in HC but not all.

The main point of discussion here is that a change in unions will not bring us WN wages. It has been stated here that why did the TWU not push for at least UA/CO wages. We had that in 2010 for the line and not far off for our base personnel but we voted it down. So we - the membership - own that. AA did not have to give us UA/CO wages and being in the 1113c process they were not bound to continue negotiating with us and maintaining the status quo as is with normal negotiations. My feeling is that AA would have gotten the abrogation, the lay offs would have proceeded while we continued to negotiate under and abrogated agreement, and maybe we would have gotten UA/CO wages after AA had already signed agreements to outsource more of overhaul. It's just a theory. I believe you at WN have more leverage because given that so much is already outsourced, there isn't much left to threaten the AMFA membership with. I believe you have a good chance of prevailing and keeping the 4th line and getting a wage increase.

Wasn't this thread about Pike's bogus crisis and hiring an attorney would he didn't need one?

Even if the AMFA didn't get us a raise, I would be confident knowing it wasn't because they pulled some TWU type deal behind closed doors to save headcount. It is embarrassing being represented (sic) by the TWU, and the international posers. AMFA can not take over soon enough.

 

[Overspeed]

It was until you claimed that AMFA gave away jobs in exchange for raises.
You tried to insinuate that if AMFA came to AA then they would want to do just that.
You said "that is the AMFA way".

If your point was about pay rates then I would agree of course that AA would not get SWA payrates just because they vote in AMFA. Everyone here knows that.

But you try to scare people into believing that if they go AMFA then they will lose their jobs.

These are two totally different arguments.

Now it appears the numbers you use to try to discredit AMFA with include cleaners and possibly others that are not AMTs which bring about other flaws in your ratio of mechs to a/c claims.
Without complete factual data you have garbage in = garbage out.

Fact. We are a small group and keep a ratio of about 3 mechs to a/c.
Fact. It has always been that way since the beginning of SWA.
Fact. AMFA did not advocate trading jobs for raises at SWA, they have added protection language to our contract and got the company to agree to language that adds a forth line in Dallas.

Now if you want to talk payrates fine.
But saying that AMFA would try to give away jobs is just stupid.

Using your number of 1000 AMTs in 1998 then the ratio is 3.6 to 1. Run that over the current fleet size of approximately 580 then AMFA should have 2,100 AMTs now. AMFA represents on the WN side approximately 1,750 I believe so that means you should have hired 350 more AMTs than you currently have to maintain status quo. Again using your numbers AMFA is not doing as well as the IBT.

AMFA has a poor track record at NW, UA, and AS in giving away overhaul work. The facts are there.

 

[WNMECH]

Using your number of 1000 AMTs in 1998 then the ratio is 3.6 to 1. Run that over the current fleet size of approximately 580 then AMFA should have 2,100 AMTs now. AMFA represents on the WN side approximately 1,750 I believe so that means you should have hired 350 more AMTs than you currently have to maintain status quo. Again using your numbers AMFA is not doing as well as the IBT.

AMFA has a poor track record at NW, UA, and AS in giving away overhaul work. The facts are there.

I said less than 1000.
It was around 950 at the end of 1998.

But why quibble over 50 mechs. A ratio of 3.4-1 in your mind is apparently still a huge difference to 3-1.

By the way did I tell you, we are still hiring for our forth line. You want to give that credit to the IBT too.

 

[swamt]

The numbers come from DOT F41. It's what all airlines use to report their data. The HC numbers do contain everyone that works in aircraft maintenance which will include AMTs, Cleaners, Facilities, and Auto Mechanics (M&R). While not entirely accurate to the head and exact job description they are a very good indicator of HC per aircraft. That being said even if there is some error, and I assume there is some, it still doesn't explain the decline in HC per aircraft at WN since 1999 to present. Either you are doing the same work with less people, the airplanes you have require less maintenance, and/or work stayed the same and more is outsourced. I believe it is a combination of both. I know you switched to a MSG3 program in the past ten years and most have and that probably accounts for some of the reduction in HC but not all.

The main point of discussion here is that a change in unions will not bring us WN wages. It has been stated here that why did the TWU not push for at least UA/CO wages. We had that in 2010 for the line and not far off for our base personnel but we voted it down. So we - the membership - own that. AA did not have to give us UA/CO wages and being in the 1113c process they were not bound to continue negotiating with us and maintaining the status quo as is with normal negotiations. My feeling is that AA would have gotten the abrogation, the lay offs would have proceeded while we continued to negotiate under and abrogated agreement, and maybe we would have gotten UA/CO wages after AA had already signed agreements to outsource more of overhaul. It's just a theory. I believe you at WN have more leverage because given that so much is already outsourced, there isn't much left to threaten the AMFA membership with. I believe you have a good chance of prevailing and keeping the 4th line and getting a wage increase.

Wasn't this thread about Pike's bogus crisis and hiring an attorney would he didn't need one?

Ok people. Here are some more acurate numbers:
SWA fleet size was 692 as of end of 3rd quarter 2012.
AMT's 2105 as of 3rd Q 2012
doing the math we have 3.0419 mechs per A/C at end of 3 Q 2012.
The number of mech's came from scenoirity list as of end of 3 Q minus controlers, instructors, and techs. However they are including plant maint, and GSE mechs.
WN is correct, SWA has always pretty much maintained an average of 3.0-3.1 mechs per A/C since the very beginning.
As I have stated before, we have always done more with less. We like it this way as well as the company. We are told everytime nego start up that SWA will pay industry leading pay, but will run very lean and mean. It's not more work being outsourced. Matter fact as previously stated, the Els. maint was moved (NOT ADDED) from another maint. facility in US that SWA was very unhappy with. As also previously stated, 4th line, mod lines, as well as new maint lines added to ATL MCO and BWI or Chicago is all maint being brought into house directly related to "AMFA" nego language during sec 6 nego's. If we still had the ibt's language none of this would be happening, and absolutely no hiring would be happening as it is now. Plain and simple AMFA has done far, far superior in the 8 years of representation, than the teamsters did in 28 years. If you think the teamsters have added any jobs or maint lines more than AMFA please post so we can prove you wrong.
On a side note; if AA votes in AMFA, you guys will not shoot to industry leading wages just because AMFA was voted in. Never has any of us (AMFA supporters) have stated this. It has been the TWU and teamster supporters telling you this. Neither will AMFA get you all raises in lue of outsourcing as some are claiming. Your wonderfull TWU union has already nego that for you. When AMFA takes over they can only enforce the contract that the TWU "AGREED TO" with the company. Now if you guys want 100% control of your union for future nego's and contract enforcement, then vote AMFA in and you will not be disappointed.
People the facts are out there for all to see. Rather you take the time to research them yourselves is completely up to you. There are some out here claiming that AMFA sold the farm at UAL. Not so. read the contract, look at the dates when AMFA took over, it's all there people. And while AMFA was there during the BK nego's they, once again, saw all the loop holes in the contract and started to plug them. AMFA came in and nego better and more protections, than they had with previous union, in I think San Fran. Research for yourselves people, it's all out there...

 

[swamt]

Using your number of 1000 AMTs in 1998 then the ratio is 3.6 to 1. Run that over the current fleet size of approximately 580 then AMFA should have 2,100 AMTs now. AMFA represents on the WN side approximately 1,750 I believe so that means you should have hired 350 more AMTs than you currently have to maintain status quo. Again using your numbers AMFA is not doing as well as the IBT.

AMFA has a poor track record at NW, UA, and AS in giving away overhaul work. The facts are there.

We didn't have 1000 AMT's in 98. We didn't have 1000 AMT's at end of 99. In 98 it was more like 750-850.
But we will use the numbers you like to use. Now we are at 2200. Let's use the average number of 900 mechs in 98. Now at 2200, that's a possitive gain of 1300 and still hiring and growing. That's well over 60% increase in mechanics. You can spin the numbers over here at SWA all you want. Your theory is pointless, and IS the only thing you have to try and twist around to look negative against AMFA. It is so hard for you guys to make AMFA look bad you are actually helping AMFA. Keep up the good work...

 

[737823]

swamt,
Which locations does WN have AMTs?

BWI, DAL, DEN, LAS, MCO, MDW and PHX? Am I missing any?

Josh

 

[swamt]

swamt,
Which locations does WN have AMTs?

BWI, DAL, DEN, LAS, MCO, MDW and PHX? Am I missing any?

Josh

Your missing alot. Just off top of head ALT, STL, SAT, LAX, OAK, MKE, Boston, alot in California. There's more but this was a quicky answer.

 

[Overspeed]

Ok people. Here are some more acurate numbers:
SWA fleet size was 692 as of end of 3rd quarter 2012.
AMT's 2105 as of 3rd Q 2012
doing the math we have 3.0419 mechs per A/C at end of 3 Q 2012.
The number of mech's came from scenoirity list as of end of 3 Q minus controlers, instructors, and techs. However they are including plant maint, and GSE mechs.
WN is correct, SWA has always pretty much maintained an average of 3.0-3.1 mechs per A/C since the very beginning.
As I have stated before, we have always done more with less. We like it this way as well as the company. We are told everytime nego start up that SWA will pay industry leading pay, but will run very lean and mean. It's not more work being outsourced. Matter fact as previously stated, the Els. maint was moved (NOT ADDED) from another maint. facility in US that SWA was very unhappy with. As also previously stated, 4th line, mod lines, as well as new maint lines added to ATL MCO and BWI or Chicago is all maint being brought into house directly related to "AMFA" nego language during sec 6 nego's. If we still had the ibt's language none of this would be happening, and absolutely no hiring would be happening as it is now. Plain and simple AMFA has done far, far superior in the 8 years of representation, than the teamsters did in 28 years. If you think the teamsters have added any jobs or maint lines more than AMFA please post so we can prove you wrong.
On a side note; if AA votes in AMFA, you guys will not shoot to industry leading wages just because AMFA was voted in. Never has any of us (AMFA supporters) have stated this. It has been the TWU and teamster supporters telling you this. Neither will AMFA get you all raises in lue of outsourcing as some are claiming. Your wonderfull TWU union has already nego that for you. When AMFA takes over they can only enforce the contract that the TWU "AGREED TO" with the company. Now if you guys want 100% control of your union for future nego's and contract enforcement, then vote AMFA in and you will not be disappointed.
People the facts are out there for all to see. Rather you take the time to research them yourselves is completely up to you. There are some out here claiming that AMFA sold the farm at UAL. Not so. read the contract, look at the dates when AMFA took over, it's all there people. And while AMFA was there during the BK nego's they, once again, saw all the loop holes in the contract and started to plug them. AMFA came in and nego better and more protections, than they had with previous union, in I think San Fran. Research for yourselves people, it's all out there...

Then bottom line is AMFA is going to get us a better contract but possibly a warm fuzzy of democracy. How's that election re-run going over there. You voted out the guys then the election gets re-run because the Nat'l doesn't like the outcome. Nice.

 

[WNMECH]

Then bottom line is AMFA is going to get us a better contract but possibly a warm fuzzy of democracy. How's that election re-run going over there. You voted out the guys then the election gets re-run because the Nat'l doesn't like the outcome. Nice.

The election is being rerun because DOL rules were broken by mistake on the part of some of those running.
Should we just ignore federal rules? Is that how the TWU does it? Nice.

By the way, you will have democracy but will probably be stuck with your TWU contract for the next six years.

But you could prepare for your next contract and not reward the TWU with your dues for the next six years just to see them do it to you again.

 

[WNMECH]

Your missing alot. Just off top of head ALT, STL, SAT, LAX, OAK, MKE, Boston, alot in California. There's more but this was a quicky answer.

HOU, TPA

 

[Al Legheny]

For some reason Observer has a problem with Seham. He keeps saying that he is a shyster etc, well he is a lawyer, but from what I've heard from the guy I know who used his services the guy isnt an ambulance chaser. They went to him. They voluntarily hired him, unlike the appointed leaders that we are forced to pay as they bring us to the bottom of the industry. Come on now, who are the shysters? Guys who misrepresent who they are while hiding behind an alias or a lawyer that members hire to represent and often prevail?

[font=Times New Roman"]"Seham's a dirt bag. The DPA started asking questions about him and they found out that he has a history of screwing people over. Pike and Seham, bird's of a feather?[/font]
[font=Trebuchet MS"]For a very long time we had been warned about problems with Seham by many others including the Teamsters (their opinions of Seham are not printable), SWAPA (the Southwest pilots' union, who terminated their relationship with Seham just this year for "incompetence and billing irregularities"), APA (the Allied Pilots Association, who fired Seham for a variety of issues including pro-management business relationships), to numerous respected individual labor and RLA attorneys who are aware of Seham's poor reputation among labor advocates. These concerns were relayed to us over time and we took each of them into consideration along the way by doing our best to investigate them and assigning some level of veracity to each of the claims. Each of these concerns with Seham were addressed openly and proactively with him in an attempt to correct problem areas and to stay on track. The efforts to resolve them internally were not successful."[/font]
[font=Arial Black"]Let’s see what others really have to say about Lee Seham [/font]"

A Conversation with Captain Steve Chase, President of the SouthWest Pilot’s Association.​

I spoke with Steve Chase today at 1:35 PM, Wednesday January 25[sup]th[/sup], 2011. I had heard that there was a letter to from Steve Chase to Mike Cleary regarding comments made by Mike about SWAPA’s relationship with Lee Seham.
I wanted to see if he would speak with me about this issue. We spoke at some length and he sent me the letter, (see above), that he sent to Mike.
Steve Chase and SWAPA do not condone or agree with Mike’s characterization of Lee Seham and they dispute his assertion that SWAPA fired Lee over billing issues. They used Lee for a very narrow issue arbitration and then went back to their former counsel when Lee’s services were no longer required.
Additionally Steve Chase advised me that his opinion of Mike Cleary is that Mike is so disruptive of the CAPA process that if he remains as the CAPA Representative that SWAPA may pull out of CAPA. He stated that the CAPA board has considered asking USAPA to leave CAPA but has declined to do so as USAPA’s National Officer elections are about to begin. They will await the outcome of the USAPA election before taking any action.
This is how the outside world and the pilots of other independent Unions view our leadership.

xxxxxxxxxx

January 25, 2012




[font=Times New Roman"]Thu 1/26/2012 6:27 PM[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Captain Chase of SWAPA[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Okay, I am in receipt of an email containing a copy of a letter from Captain Chase of SWAPA to Captain Cleary of USAPA dated 2 December, 2011.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Because these things can be copied/altered, this morning, I called Captain Chase of SWAPA. After an hour or so, we had a chat.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]After pleasantries, we got down to business, and first up was to verify the letter as I received it. It is genuine.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Since it has been almost two months, 2 December, 2011 to 26 January 2012, I then asked Captain Chase of SWAPA if Captain Cleary of USAPA or anyone else from USAPA had gotten back to him.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]He said that, up until yesterday, no one had. I asked what happened yesterday.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]He said that he sent an email to Captain Cleary of USAPA and the board of directors verifying if Captain Cleary of USAPA was in receipt of his letter and asking if there was to be action from USAPA, or words to that affect.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Last night, his Vice-President, but not him, then received an email acknowledging the 2 December letter and, almost demanding, to know why the USAPA Board (BPR) had been copied in and that Captain Cleary wanted the addresses of the SWAPA board members.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Captain Chase of SWAPA, this morning, then furnished Captain Cleary the requested information, asking when he could receive the requested retraction.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]ALSO[/font][font=Times New Roman"], as if we need more.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Vice-President Mowery gave a report in the 24 January, 2012 communication posted as "[/font][font=Helvetica"]BPR Special Telephonic Meeting Recap".[/font]

[font=Helvetica"]In it, he details that his laptop was stolen (the same one being investigated for the alleged felonious email to Lee Seham?). He also goes on to say that an employee of the Sheraton Four Points (formerly Morgan Suites) was mugged with baseball bats.[/font]

[font=Arial"]Captain Mowrey then addressed recent crime issues having occurred at or nearby the USAPA Office. This includes a stolen laptop from VP Mowrey's office, and the assault and severe injury of a Sheraton Four Points hotel employee nearby USAPA headquarters. The hotel employee was beaten severely with baseball bats and this is believed by Charlotte Police Department to be a possible gang initiation. It was also stressed that all volunteers and visitors be vigilant and extremely careful when leaving the office.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Steve Sevier, Chairman of the USAPA Security Committee, was asked to view office security tapes of the hallways associated with Vice-President Mowery's office during the time period the vice-president maintained that it would have been stolen, from a locked desk drawer? He also interviewed the hotel employee.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Guys, I would like something in writing, a report if you will, what the board has done and will do concerning the "misunderstanding" between USAPA and SWAPA as well as a written report from Steve Sevier. Would Wednesday of next week be too soon?[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Thank you,[/font]

xxxxxxxxxx


See The attachments from Sully Sullenberger, the IBT and the NBA.

 

[swamt]

Then bottom line is AMFA is going to get us a better contract but possibly a warm fuzzy of democracy. How's that election re-run going over there. You voted out the guys then the election gets re-run because the Nat'l doesn't like the outcome. Nice.

Once again you are wrong. It's already been explained to you why the National ruled for a re-run. If the National did not step up, investigate, and rule for a new election, then AMFA would have been investigated by the DOT and faced rather large fines and penalties.
The re-run is going very well. Just yet another way to show all you out here how democratic AMFA is. This re-run would have never happend with the teamsters still here. Don't know for fact but I would be willing to bet the TWU wouldn't either.

 

[Overspeed]

We didn't have 1000 AMT's in 98. We didn't have 1000 AMT's at end of 99. In 98 it was more like 750-850.
But we will use the numbers you like to use. Now we are at 2200. Let's use the average number of 900 mechs in 98. Now at 2200, that's a possitive gain of 1300 and still hiring and growing. That's well over 60% increase in mechanics. You can spin the numbers over here at SWA all you want. Your theory is pointless, and IS the only thing you have to try and twist around to look negative against AMFA. It is so hard for you guys to make AMFA look bad you are actually helping AMFA. Keep up the good work...

First I used DOL F41 numbers and you didn't agree with that then I used WNMECH's numbers and now you run his numbers down. Either way, WN did not add AMTs at a rate that maintains the status quo prior to AMFA in fact work has been outsourced at a rate that exceeds that of pre-AMFA representational days. Why? Some may be related to new aircraft and MSG3 however the agreement you have in place defends lines of work in this case 4. As WN aircraft become older more LC/HC work will be required driving more lines to maintain the same fleet size. You still have language that maxes out at 4 and now Sokol wants to drop that to three. Sokol knows that more work is coming since your -700s are getting in to their HC cycle. I look forward to seeing AMFA reign victorious in the fight to maintain the 4th line and maintaining current rates of pay. What is this "alternate" pay scale they want?

 

[Overspeed]

For some reason Observer has a problem with Seham. He keeps saying that he is a shyster etc, well he is a lawyer, but from what I've heard from the guy I know who used his services the guy isnt an ambulance chaser. They went to him. They voluntarily hired him, unlike the appointed leaders that we are forced to pay as they bring us to the bottom of the industry. Come on now, who are the shysters? Guys who misrepresent who they are while hiding behind an alias or a lawyer that members hire to represent and often prevail?

[font=Times New Roman"]"Seham's a dirt bag. The DPA started asking questions about him and they found out that he has a history of screwing people over. Pike and Seham, bird's of a feather?[/font]
[font=Trebuchet MS"]For a very long time we had been warned about problems with Seham by many others including the Teamsters (their opinions of Seham are not printable), SWAPA (the Southwest pilots' union, who terminated their relationship with Seham just this year for "incompetence and billing irregularities"), APA (the Allied Pilots Association, who fired Seham for a variety of issues including pro-management business relationships), to numerous respected individual labor and RLA attorneys who are aware of Seham's poor reputation among labor advocates. These concerns were relayed to us over time and we took each of them into consideration along the way by doing our best to investigate them and assigning some level of veracity to each of the claims. Each of these concerns with Seham were addressed openly and proactively with him in an attempt to correct problem areas and to stay on track. The efforts to resolve them internally were not successful."[/font]
[font=Arial Black"]Let’s see what others really have to say about Lee Seham [/font]"

A Conversation with Captain Steve Chase, President of the SouthWest Pilot’s Association.​

I spoke with Steve Chase today at 1:35 PM, Wednesday January 25[sup]th[/sup], 2011. I had heard that there was a letter to from Steve Chase to Mike Cleary regarding comments made by Mike about SWAPA’s relationship with Lee Seham.
I wanted to see if he would speak with me about this issue. We spoke at some length and he sent me the letter, (see above), that he sent to Mike.
Steve Chase and SWAPA do not condone or agree with Mike’s characterization of Lee Seham and they dispute his assertion that SWAPA fired Lee over billing issues. They used Lee for a very narrow issue arbitration and then went back to their former counsel when Lee’s services were no longer required.
Additionally Steve Chase advised me that his opinion of Mike Cleary is that Mike is so disruptive of the CAPA process that if he remains as the CAPA Representative that SWAPA may pull out of CAPA. He stated that the CAPA board has considered asking USAPA to leave CAPA but has declined to do so as USAPA’s National Officer elections are about to begin. They will await the outcome of the USAPA election before taking any action.
This is how the outside world and the pilots of other independent Unions view our leadership.

xxxxxxxxxx

January 25, 2012




[font=Times New Roman"]Thu 1/26/2012 6:27 PM[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Captain Chase of SWAPA[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Okay, I am in receipt of an email containing a copy of a letter from Captain Chase of SWAPA to Captain Cleary of USAPA dated 2 December, 2011.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Because these things can be copied/altered, this morning, I called Captain Chase of SWAPA. After an hour or so, we had a chat.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]After pleasantries, we got down to business, and first up was to verify the letter as I received it. It is genuine.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Since it has been almost two months, 2 December, 2011 to 26 January 2012, I then asked Captain Chase of SWAPA if Captain Cleary of USAPA or anyone else from USAPA had gotten back to him.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]He said that, up until yesterday, no one had. I asked what happened yesterday.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]He said that he sent an email to Captain Cleary of USAPA and the board of directors verifying if Captain Cleary of USAPA was in receipt of his letter and asking if there was to be action from USAPA, or words to that affect.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Last night, his Vice-President, but not him, then received an email acknowledging the 2 December letter and, almost demanding, to know why the USAPA Board (BPR) had been copied in and that Captain Cleary wanted the addresses of the SWAPA board members.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Captain Chase of SWAPA, this morning, then furnished Captain Cleary the requested information, asking when he could receive the requested retraction.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]ALSO[/font][font=Times New Roman"], as if we need more.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Vice-President Mowery gave a report in the 24 January, 2012 communication posted as "[/font][font=Helvetica"]BPR Special Telephonic Meeting Recap".[/font]

[font=Helvetica"]In it, he details that his laptop was stolen (the same one being investigated for the alleged felonious email to Lee Seham?). He also goes on to say that an employee of the Sheraton Four Points (formerly Morgan Suites) was mugged with baseball bats.[/font]

[font=Arial"]Captain Mowrey then addressed recent crime issues having occurred at or nearby the USAPA Office. This includes a stolen laptop from VP Mowrey's office, and the assault and severe injury of a Sheraton Four Points hotel employee nearby USAPA headquarters. The hotel employee was beaten severely with baseball bats and this is believed by Charlotte Police Department to be a possible gang initiation. It was also stressed that all volunteers and visitors be vigilant and extremely careful when leaving the office.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Steve Sevier, Chairman of the USAPA Security Committee, was asked to view office security tapes of the hallways associated with Vice-President Mowery's office during the time period the vice-president maintained that it would have been stolen, from a locked desk drawer? He also interviewed the hotel employee.[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Guys, I would like something in writing, a report if you will, what the board has done and will do concerning the "misunderstanding" between USAPA and SWAPA as well as a written report from Steve Sevier. Would Wednesday of next week be too soon?[/font]

[font=Times New Roman"]Thank you,[/font]

xxxxxxxxxx


See The attachments from Sully Sullenberger, the IBT and the NBA.

Why not post AMFA's case docket on terminations. I would like to know if after paying someone $500K a year to present cases he smoked WN. And did Seham do Pike's deal pro bono? How about the two TWU members that Pike was unable to represent and they had to hire Seham? Did Seham do that pro bono too?

 

[Bob Owens]

Why not post AMFA's case docket on terminations. I would like to know if after paying someone $500K a year to present cases he smoked WN. And did Seham do Pike's deal pro bono? How about the two TWU members that Pike was unable to represent and they had to hire Seham? Did Seham do that pro bono too?

Why do you care?

Does Rosen work pro bono or does the TWU pay him in excess of $200K a year to pull the rug out from under TWU Locals who are fighting to keep work? (Local 501)

Local 501 filed a lawsuit and Rosen testified for the company and sunk their case.