Do you understand how the appellate system work regarding a CIVIL case?
Yeah, a little bit. You/we appeal, you/we get a hearing or you/we dont. Lose and appeal to the court en banc. Maybe get a hearing there, maybe not. Lose on appeal, you/we go for the Hail Mary to the Supreme Court. Fairly simple. Did I miss any of the possible steps?
And as for that "All we have to do is defend" comment, USAPA isn't doing so well. But hey, its only dues money, right?
And YOUR agency fees. Thank you, suzie (I know your not suzie).
Ummmm, have you not seen the lastest PHX Crew News? Need to watch it so you don't start spending any of that "pay increase." Hard to misinterpret what Kirby said.
PHX crew news. Now theres a keeper. If parker denies us, we file a grievance. After we win and parker still denies us, normally we could go to court for injunctive relief. But by then well be already in Section 6 negotiations. Now its a major dispute, maybe even viewed as company self-help, without NMB permission. No telling where that could go. If parker goes down that road, hes looking for a showdown because hes got something more sinister in mind. As long as were still separate operations, hes got two separate groups he can spin off. Worst case for you, he merges East with UAL and lets his money-losing hubs just disappear. Worst case for us, not sure there is a worst case for us, except more lawsuits. But then youd be suing ALPA, because under the preponderance of membership provisions in NMB rules, once a single-carrier finding, there doesnt even have to be a vote and I get to be an ALPA non-member again. Guess you could collect balance in USAPAs bank account.
You may be surprised...again.
Plaintiffs’ ISSUE #2: Whether USAPA so violated its duty of fair
representation that the Court should order the airline and USAPA to
submit to NMB mediation/arbitration to create and implement a single
joint collective bargaining agreement that incorporates the Nicolau
Award seniority list.
Plaintiffs Contend: Yes. (holding that the duty to bargain in good
faith “was intended to be more than a mere statement of policy or
exhortation to the parties; rather, it was designed to be a legal obligation,
enforceable by whatever appropriate means might be developed on a caseby-
case basis.â€); United Air Lines, Inc. v. Air Line Pilots Assn., Intern.
2008 WL 4936847, 35 (N.D. Ill. 2008) (“[T]he obligation to make and
maintain agreements without interruption to the carrier's operations is …
an affirmative legal obligation, enforceable by … injunction.â€).
CONTEND? Hows that one playing out in limines? Showing good faith, we tried to bring in an NMB facilitator (thats pre Section 6 and mediation/arbitration) 2 months ago. Parker didnt go for that.
This may surprise you, but I like the idea of NMB mediation/arbitration track, especially with a Federal Judge looking over our shoulder. Then parker cant hide behind his bad-faith rope-a-dope tactics. But do you really believe parker will let a Federal judge force him into mediation/arbitration if he doesnt want to be there? Hell be in court fighting it til planes are replaced with Mag-Levs.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that cool $70 million.
We havent.
ISSUE #3: Whether, in a reasonably cost-neutral manner, West Pilots
now on furlough can be recalled and East Pilots furloughed in their place.
Plaintiffs Contend: Yes. There are more than enough East Pilots working
in positions for which the West Pilots on furlough are fully trained. There
are more than enough East Pilots flying in and out of the domicile cities to
which the currently furloughed West Pilots were assigned. Any costs to
the Airline from recalling West Pilots and furloughing East Pilots can be
set off against funds that the Airline will soon be due to pay to East Pilots.
And hows that issue going? So all East pilots, even dues objectors, get to pay for training events? YHGTBKM!
QUOTE (cleardirect @ Apr 22 2009, 08:11 AM) *Calling the judge delusional already? I guess it is never to early to find excuses. These were his words in reference to usapa not following a finding of liability against usapa.
No, I said you were delusional: “Quite a stretch, clear. A DFR win=a contempt citation? And you say were delusional?â€
(cleardirect @ Apr 22 2009, 08:40 AM) *
Nos, Seham will or should be irrelevant at trial. Usapa is spending huge dollars on a PHL lawyer named Brengle. He is suppose to be the trial litigator. What insults? Are you imagining something? What words in that statement do you find insulting? I never said anything bad about Brengle or his qualifications. It is usapa that brought Bregle in for a reason. To litigate at trial not Seham.
Obviously I was commenting on your constant insults on Seeham. Brengle named trial attorney back in February. Truth is most of the points the judge ruled on were initiated by Brengle. So go ahead and insult him.
Steve