Oh come on, hp, "potentially?" We"re already split, even back to the last year of ALPAs iron-fisted rule. Once the Nic came out, we fractured. Fact of life, hp, made worse by Wests jumpseat denials and flip-offs. "Nor even your current employer?" Remember Love Canal? Occidental ate the past acts when they bought Hooker 20 years after the pollution stopped. Thats the way the legal system works, hp, or did your legal training miss that? I think we all know US Airways did survive, just as predicted by West merger attorney Freund in August 2005.
And I still dont see your angle. Spending all that time in court, all the time on this chat. Either you bored, are totally narsisistic enjoying the spolight you created for yourself or your shilling for the company or the west or ALPA or any and all of them.
ALPA boogeymen everywhere.
Ni4, I assume so. I hope so. If we can vote as a whole on your age 58, then you have a right to vote on our retirement investigation assessment, although I hear West wont be assessed. Im into the democracy thing. By a 11-3 vote, we voted to appeal DFR. We"ll play it out. We cant appeal until his remedy is released. Just like the pension investigation (if it passes), we need the closure on the DFR. If we lose, its over and Nic is in any TA put out for vote.
What you hear is correct. No west assessment. I believe I warned all of you about an east only assessment back in April. I was scoffed at. Oh well maybe you will start to believe me sometimes. Democracy, tyranny whatever.
“We voted to appeal DFR†My, my are you one of the BPR members or just trying to elevate your status a bit? If you are a BPR member that would explain a lot.
“If we lose, it’s over and the Nic is in any TA put out for vote†At least that reality is starting to take hold. Just as a reminder. The ruling stands as is unless the appeal is granted. So once we get the ruling. The Nicolau is in any TA. We do not have to wait until the appeal is done some 18 months from now.
On subject voting, Wakes got some real thinking to do. The TA does not say how the vote is done, only refers to ALPA merger policy. He says ALPA merger policy rules. Ok, then each "side" gets to vote separately and veto the other side. That makes the TA harder to pass. But if he allows a combined vote, hes in violation of ALPA merger policy. Why important? A combined, no-veto vote plays into the hands of the company making it easier to pass a marginal contract, for sure every west member in good standing would vote NIC, regardless of the rest of the TA. The question is, can Wake essentially write a remedy that contradicts his jury instructions?
OK please educate me. I did a word search in the ALPA merger policy. I used ratify, veto, vote, separate. Nowhere in there did I see where is says anything about separate contract votes or that either side gets a “vetoâ€. Could you point out that section and specific paragraph where the ALPA merger policy says that?
Another assumption from you and the east pilots in general. The west pilots are going to look at the contract in total before voting. My guess is that it takes three tries before it passes.
Please tell us what jury instructions do you think that judge Wake is going to contradict?
Wakes got a history of reversing himself in the same case. Last year he ruled against a defendant and then 7 months later reversed himself in the same trial. Kind of a John Kerry, “I voted for funding the war before I voted against it†in reverse. Weâ€ll see if he pulls a 180 here, sooner or later. Hes got a legal snag and a legal "out" that he just might have to use, but Ill let you sweat what it is. Mr Snoop
So scary, so mysterious. Has the BPR found a smoking gun? “A history†would that be one case or several cases? Are you now going to find fault with someone for admitting and correcting an error? So critical. To bad usapa or Seham can not admit when they are wrong. How about letting the rest of us mortals in on the usapa insider info. The same info paid for by the members.
You will let us sweat. Well it is PHX and almost 100 now. That probably has more to do with it then some perceived golden nugget of information. Legal snag. Right! Did he hit that on the golf course during his vacation? But I suppose that you think the summary judgment just filed has a chance also.
