US Pilot Labor Thread for the week 6/6 to 6/13

[BoeingBoy]

Nice try, but it has never been instituted.

Instituted and adjudicated are two different things.......

But it's good to see that you agree with the unfairness part.

I've always said that there were two items in the Nic award that I didn't agree with......nothing new there.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Ah...the Supreme Court has ruled.

Actually they have. Said tha a union action undertaken solely to benefit one group of members at the expense of another is on it's face evidence of a DFR violation.

Jim

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Actually they have. Said tha a union action undertaken solely to benefit one group of members at the expense of another is on it's face evidence of a DFR violation.

Jim

Good. Then DOH (with restrictions) is a done deal since in the long run it will benefit EVERYONE!

 

[Piedmont1984]

Actually they have. Said tha a union action undertaken solely to benefit one group of members at the expense of another is on it's face evidence of a DFR violation.

Jim

This would be the Supreme Court of the country in which labor unions, by and large, merge using DOH.

 

[nostradamus]

And ALPA was bad why?

luvn737s
Rating: 0
View Member Profile
Find Member's Posts
Posted on: Aug 12 2004, 08:50 PM

"""Almost anyone flying for HP under age 50 that could get an offer from WN would jump at the chance. The demographics of the current UAir pilot group are the equivalent of each of them starting all over again if they accept this ultimatum. They avoid the uncertainty of getting another job and they get to park at the same place, but that's about it.

Why doesn't ALPA accept that there are no "have" and "have not" airlines and negotiate one contract for all airlines? Oh, because the President of ALPA works for a "have" airline. For now."""

Nostradamus question to your quote above;;

I see your opinions have changed over the last few years regarding alpa policy. Can you tell us what event in your life changed your opinion? Was it your one year you were a have and the other 24 years have not?

 

[luvn737s]

luvn737s
Rating: 0
View Member Profile
Find Member's Posts
Posted on: Aug 12 2004, 08:50 PM

"""Almost anyone flying for HP under age 50 that could get an offer from WN would jump at the chance. The demographics of the current UAir pilot group are the equivalent of each of them starting all over again if they accept this ultimatum. They avoid the uncertainty of getting another job and they get to park at the same place, but that's about it.

Why doesn't ALPA accept that there are no "have" and "have not" airlines and negotiate one contract for all airlines? Oh, because the President of ALPA works for a "have" airline. For now."""

Nostradamus question to your quote above;;

I see your opinions have changed over the last few years regarding alpa policy. Can you tell us what event in your life changed your opinion? Was it your one year you were a have and the other 24 years have not?

No nosty, nothing has changed in the past 4 years. Go back to bed.

 

[checksix]

The courts are where the West pilots are going to sue USAPA when USAPA tries to negotiate a DOH seniority list or contract.

With "whom" will USAPA negotiate a seniority list with? USAPA is the keeper of the list, they present the list to the company. The way the company will deal with the list is already outlined in both east and west pilot contracts.

In effect, the list is already a done deal, sue all you want, you will not change anything because your union will decide how the seniority issues are addressed. If you have an issue with the proposed seniority list based on DOH with appropriate conditions and restrictions to protect both east and west pilots, I suggest you bring that to your reps attention - that's the only place seniority issues will be addressed, not at the negotiating table.

Call your rep traderjake!

 

[nostradamus]

No nosty, nothing has changed in the past 4 years. Go back to bed.

Hypocrite.

 

[BoeingBoy]

This would be the Supreme Court of the country in which labor unions, by and large, merge using DOH.

If that's the good old USA, then yes it would be that Supreme Court.

What's at question isn't how the list is/was determined - it's the union's actions after a merger, oddly enough. Despite the verbal gymnastics that some use in an attempt to make the Nic list invalid (moot, whatever), it was arrived at and delivered to the company in compliance with the contracts of both groups. Contracts that USAPA is still responsible to uphold. What the Supreme Court said was that a change in policy, after the fact, to solely benefit one group over another is automatically a DFR violation.

Jim

 

[EastUS]

What's at question isn't how the list is/was determined -

That's true. What's more at question is whether or not any attempted litigation from the west would/will mean anything at all, in the final analysis. As to that....no opinions expressed here mean zip, and this can and will likely be bantered about ad infinitum in the meanwhile. Why you've such an evident enthusiasm for seeing the bulk of your previous coworkers many years of service invalidated by an Alpa abortion, and fully trashed by this Nic abomination's a complete mystery to me. If you indeed spent years giving your time to Alpa work, and this is what you'd wish on your past coworkers...then I must note that I'm doubly pleased at having Alpa gone.....but no matter. Time and events will determine the outcome. We're all entitiled to our respective opinions.

Luvn737s:: "No nosty, nothing has changed in the past 4 years. Go back to bed." That's excellent news. It would seem that nothing's disenfranchised, nor harmed you then, by way of your not receiving your St. Nic gifts...Glad to hear that

 

[BoeingBoy]

We're all entitiled to our respective opinions.

Like your opinion that I have "such an evident enhtusiasm [sic] for seeing the bulk of your previous coworkers many years of service invalidated and fully trashed by this Nic abomination." You're even entitled to call your opinions "principles" while dismissing others' opinions as "It's all about MEEEEEEE....."

Jim

 

[EastUS]

Like your opinion that I have "such an evident enhtusiasm [sic] for seeing the bulk of your previous coworkers many years of service invalidated and fully trashed by this Nic abomination." You're even entitled to call your opinions "principles" while dismissing others' opinions as "It's all about MEEEEEEE....."

Jim

I call 'em like I see 'em.

When anyone, with far less work experience and years of service, seeks to replace another with much more of both.....I have to credit the former with a full abundance of "It's all about MEEEEEEE....." To my mind?....How anyone could try and 'spin" such otherwise speaks little for having "principles" of any kind. I will never understand theslightest moral basis for "relative seniority", which to me, is as unprincipled a notion as I've ever seen. We all have our different opinions. I don't equate opinions with "principles"....of course..that's just my "opinion"

 

[Phoenix]

If that's the good old USA, then yes it would be that Supreme Court.

What's at question isn't how the list is/was determined - it's the union's actions after a merger, oddly enough. Despite the verbal gymnastics that some use in an attempt to make the Nic list invalid (moot, whatever), it was arrived at and delivered to the company in compliance with the contracts of both groups. Contracts that USAPA is still responsible to uphold. What the Supreme Court said was that a change in policy, after the fact, to solely benefit one group over another is automatically a DFR violation.

Jim

Relax a little... go play some golf and take a little pleasure in knowing that ALPA is no longer the reason you don't have a vote in union matters.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I call 'em like I see 'em.

As do I.....

go play some golf

Got a foursome lined up for tomorrow - we're supposed to get a little relief from the heat.

Jim

 

[Piedmont1984]

BoeingBoy, I have been reading your posts for over a year now. You are one of those who always shows up at the fight with more ammo than the other guy. You are also an east retiree. And yet your posts have a definite pro-west bias. Do you have an axe to grind with your former coworkers, or a relative or best friend who is a west pilot? You shared a cockpit with these east men and women for years. Surely you have some sense of empathy for their predicament in the wake of the award - not to mention loyalty to them in their struggle.

You can quote law and statute, chapter and verse, all day long. But blind obedience to statute, or ALPA procedure, or legal case law does not guarrantee that justice has been done, or that injustice has been prevented.

Methinks you have lost sight of the forest.