US Airways ALPA MEC Cairman's Message - June 26, 2007

[Walmartgreeter]

Aqua....a simple "BS" would have sufficed. No attorney would ever let you on the stand in a jury trial....your fear that there may be some merit here is overflowing, to say the least.

That said, as I have said before, I will be shocked if any court overturns this award...it is very, very hard to overturn an arbitrated award. I wish Prater would just do his job and have the EC make a decision, either way.

But Hey! Nothing to lose here on the East by trying, is there? Just more time to get our ducks in a row for other "activities."


Greeter.

 

[CactusFlyr]

AAA MEC


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3JE4WRL-8

 

[Hawkhunter]

Believe what you want to if it makes you feel better, but it won't change reality. Your complaint cannot survive on its own. Rather, the only way its lifespan might be measured in weeks instead of days or hours is how ALPA and the West choose to respond. There isn't any reason for either party to lift a finger in light of what the district court will probably do, which is dismiss.

Dang it, I thought we had something there. But since you said it is a waste of time and we will lose I am going to write a stern letter to my rep and tell him to stop all this. Thank you for setting this straight for us. You guys are the best and I know you are looking out for us as well. Man I miss AWA320.

 

[pilot]

Believe what you want to if it makes you feel better, but it won't change reality. Your complaint cannot survive on its own. Rather, the only way its lifespan might be measured in weeks instead of days or hours is how ALPA and the West choose to respond. There isn't any reason for either party to lift a finger in light of what the district court will probably do, which is dismiss.

As to the efficacy of your firm filing the complaint in the first place, I've never met a lawyer who would refuse work from a client dumb enough to be billed for work that will produce nothing. Even though the reply brief could be written by a law student because the grounds for dismissal are that clear, I suspect your firm was happy to bill ten, maybe twenty grand just for your claim. The only thing which really limits a lawyer from filing a claim is Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. There, the only limit is where an attorney files a claim without substantial justification, then sanctions could ensue. This means that when a claim constitutes harrassment, is groundless, or not made in good faith could result in an attorney being sanctioned. Courts are pretty liberal, however. If there is any subjective belief that a colorable case for the claim exists, then Rule 11 won't be a problem for the attorney, especially in a matter like this. So don't make the mistake of believing that the simple act of filing a claim by your paid attorney somehow amounts to having valid claim. It doesn't.

We don't have a valid claim. Simply because you just said so! What other proof do we need?

The Nic award was completely valid. You said so. Nothing is wrong with it. You said so.

It is binding. You said so. You interpreted the award and the legalities surrounding it. You got it right.

You are the man. I fail to see why you are wasting your time flying airplanes. You are Perry Mason. Johnny Cochran. F. Lee Baily. And any other attorney who knows his stuff.

You got this all correct. You are the man. Great Job!!!!!

 

[aquagreen73s]

We don't have a valid claim. Simply because you just said so! What other proof do we need?

The Nic award was completely valid. You said so. Nothing is wrong with it. You said so.

It is binding. You said so. You interpreted the award and the legalities surrounding it. You got it right.

You are the man. I fail to see why you are wasting your time flying airplanes. You are Perry Mason. Johnny Cochran. F. Lee Baily. And any other attorney who knows his stuff.

You got this all correct. You are the man. Great Job!!!!!

You can accept reality now and save some money, or you can spend a bunch of money to get the same result. It's up to you. I'm sure your attorney appreciates the business though! Who knows, maybe he needs a new spinnaker for his yacht or his old lady wants a new Mercedes.

 

[BoeingBoy]

The purpose in asking ALPA National "that ALPA International to deny any requests from the AWA MEC to release the Nicolau Award to US Airways, while its validity under ALPA Merger Policy is being determined by the Court" is an attempt to reach a consensual agreement per the May 24 EC resolution instead of court action.

Well, court action has started so it's difficult to see where "instead of court action" plays in the request that the list not be released to the company.

Seems more likely that someone realized that ALPA would not throw out the award or sit on it much longer.

So every effort - filing a suit on the day of the EC meeting, "asking" that the award not be officially released, "asking" that ALPA continue "to facilitate a settlement between the two pilot groups" - is all an effort to keep the award from being forwarded to the company.

Wonder why all the activity to prevent the award from being released to the company? Could someone have finally discovered the "little secret" hiding in plain sight within the CBA?

Jim

 

[hp_fa]

I haven't seen the Complaint yet, so I don't know the actual parties and what is contained in the Prayer for Relief. However, unless the plaintiffs have filed for a TRO, there is no legal basis for ALPA to not accept the Nicolau award. Failing to do so in a timely manner likely will cause a DFR lawsuit by West. I suspect ALPA would be more concerned about any DFR action from West rather then East since ALPA appears to have a duty to enforce the arbitration award.

I will be very interested in reading the Complaint, especially if there is any kind of "Verification" attached to it.

 

[pilot]

You can accept reality now and save some money, or you can spend a bunch of money to get the same result. It's up to you. I'm sure your attorney appreciates the business though! Who knows, maybe he needs a new spinnaker for his yacht or his old lady wants a new Mercedes.

I've accepted reality because you said so.

That makes me as smart as you.

I'm not sure what I'll do with the money I'm going to save though. Maybe go to law school so I can figure out all the stuff you know.

By the way, would you like to take me up on the wager I issued on a different post? Surely you know it's an easy slam dunk winner for you.

pilot

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

2007 CA 004358 B US AIRWAYS MASTER EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Vs. AMERICA WEST MASTER EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

File Date 06/26/2007 Case Status Open Case Status Date 06/26/2007
Case Disposition Undisposed Case Disposition Date



Party Information
Party Name Party Alias(es) Party Type Attorney(s) Attorney Phone
US AIRWAYS MASTER EXECUTIVE COUNCIL PLAINTIFF WILDER, JR, Mr ROLAND P (202)223-0723


AMERICA WEST MASTER EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Defendant



Case Schedule
Date Start Time Event Type Result
10/05/2007 09:30 AM Initial Scheduling Conference-60



Financial Entries
Receipt # Date Received From Amount Paid
76526 06/26/2007 WILDER Jr, Mr ROLAND P 120.00

Payment
Check 120.00

Fee
Cost 120.00






Docket Entries
Date Text
06/26/2007 Event Scheduled Event: Initial Scheduling Conference-60 Date: 10/05/2007 Time: 9:30 am Judge: MOTLEY, THOMAS J Location: Courtroom 112
06/26/2007 Motion/Application Regarding Arbitration Award (D.C. 16-4315) Filed Attorney: WILDER Jr, Mr ROLAND P (069609) Receipt: 76526 Date: 06/26/2007

 

[hp_fa]

Charlie, the only thing that docket entry seems to indicate is that East paid a filing fee of $120.00, thant a status hearing is set for early October and that it also filed some form of Motion regarding the arbitration.

If the docket entry is full and complete it indicates that the sole defendant is the AWA MEC, which frankly doesn't currently make sense because what has the AWA MEC done to East other then win an arbitration?

The text of the Complaint will be required to see what the heck East hopes to gain, but this looks curious and also, preliminarilly, provides no basis for ALPA to not act and accept the arbitration award.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

http://www.dccourts.gov/dccourts/docs/DCSC_Bio_Motley.pdf

THE HONORABLE THOMAS J. MOTLEY
ASSOCIATE JUDGE
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Judge Thomas John Motley was appointed to the Superior Court of the District of
Columbia in 2000 by President William Jefferson Clinton.
Judge Motley was born in Washington, D.C., and spent most of his childhood in
Cheraw, South Carolina. Judge Motley received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy
from Columbia College in 1976. He received his law degree in 1979 from Harvard Law
School, where he was a staff editor for the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law
Review. The following year, Judge Motley served as a law clerk to Judge Robert F. Collins
of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
In 1980, Judge Motley joined the District of Columbia law firm of Steptoe &
Johnson. After two and a half years in private practice, he entered public service, becoming
an Assistant United States Attorney in the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of
Columbia in 1983.
Over the next fifteen years, Judge Motley served with distinction in nearly every
section of the United States Attorney’s Office, trying over 60 cases in both local and federal
court, including cases involving charges of robbery, murder, bribery, perjury, mail fraud,
and conspiracies to commit government fraud. He served the majority of his tenure in the
Office in the Public Corruption/Government Fraud Section, where he was primarily
responsible for investigating and prosecuting violations of federal criminal laws adversely
affecting the integrity of both federal and local governments. As a line Assistant U.S.
Attorney, Judge Motley received eight Department of Justice Special Achievement Awards
and, in 1996, he received the Department of Justice Director’s Award, one of the highest
honors presented to an Assistant United States Attorney. In 1997, Judge Motley was
appointed Senior Litigation Counsel and later appointed the Acting Chief of the Public
Corruption/Government Fraud Section of the United States Attorney's Office.
In January 1998, then United States Attorney Wilma A. Lewis appointed Judge
Motley to the position of Principal Assistant United States Attorney, making him the
second-in-command of the largest United States Attorney’s Office in the country, with
nearly 340 attorneys and an equal number of support personnel. In this position, he
participated in and contributed to all major decisions regarding policies, initiatives,
personnel, supervision and evaluation of major criminal and civil cases in the office.
Judge Motley received numerous awards throughout his tenure at the United States
Attorney’s Office. In 1996, then United States Attorney Eric H. Holder, Jr., presented Judge
Motley with the Harold J. Sullivan Award, annually awarded by the Assistant United States
Attorneys Association to the Assistant United States Attorney who “best exemplifies selfless
devotion, personal courage, professional fairness, and trial excellence.â€￾ In 1999, United
States Attorney Lewis presented Judge Motley with the STAR (Special Thanks for
Achieving Results) Award, in recognition of his contributions as Principal Assistant.
Judge Motley has been an active member of the Thurgood Marshall Inn of Court
since its founding in 1990. He was a member of Big Brothers/Big Sisters of the National
Capital Area for ten years, and in 1995, was recognized as the National Big Brother of
the Year. As a former member of the Board of Directors of the local organization, Judge
Motley encouraged others to become Big Brothers and to become more involved in our
community.
Judge Motley was sworn in as an Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the
District of Columbia, on October 27, 2000, and has presided over matters on the juvenile,
paternity & support, mental health and felony II calendars. He currently presides over
domestic violence matters.

 

[700UW]

Would not be surprised if ALPA National puts the east in Trusteeship.

 

[ussnark]

So every effort - filing a suit on the day of the EC meeting, "asking" that the award not be officially released, "asking" that ALPA continue "to facilitate a settlement between the two pilot groups" - is all an effort to keep the award from being forwarded to the company.

I believe, Jim, though IANAL, that they are laying the groundwork for future legal action by formally asking for certain actions to not occur. It is pure paperwork so that when a judge, on reviewing the history of what happened, does not have to discover that AAA MEC did not first ask for consideration.

That is all.

 

[prechilill]

What all this means is that the AAA MEC is desperate. They sense that the hour is near that ALPA will continue with its contactual obligations and forward the list to Parker. The only way out is a temporary stay, like a last minute appeal to the US Supreme Court for a death row inmate, to keep the inevitable from happening.

There are two very very big obstacles facing the AAA Hail Mary: one is jurisdictional, the other is the nature of the relief they are calling upon the distict court to grant.

EXCELLENT POST!
The only harm from this award goes to the senior HP pilots which lost 15% on the combined seniority list. All of the AAA pilots stayed the same or gained in their relative seniority

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

As I indicated a few days ago, there was going to be legal action and I now understand there is a legal precedent to support the US Airways pilot's position.


More on this later as the US Airways MEC's strategy continues to unfold, which will not be made public prematurely on this website.

You mean this garbage?

A laughable argument