US Pilots Labor Discussion 1/13- OBSERVE THE RULES OF THE BOARD!

[Waketurbulence]

Another loss for USAPA.



IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Change Venue and
Transfer to Another District, Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (doc. # 622) is denied.
DATED this 21st day of January, 2010.


Neil V. Wake"

Darn biased, senile, unfair, hands behind our back, local boy, doesn't know anything about law, poo poo poddy Judge! :angry:


<_<

 

[HPDriver]

Another loss for USAPA.

Change of Venue denied.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Not really. The jumpseat belongs to the airline. At USAirways, the captain is given wide control over its use, but it is far from absolute. (Try denying an FAA enroute inspection sometime and see just who the jumpseat belongs to.)

That being said, the control of the jumpseat can be revoked by the company at any time. Look at all those years that Delta pilots couldn't even ride their OWN jumpseat. How could that have happened if the jumpseat "belonged" to the captain?

All true enough. I was simplifying just a little bit to make a simple point, that's all. Spouting off on a web board about not giving someone a ride on jumpseat does hardly qualifies as criminal activity, deserving of being named in a multimillion dollar racketeering case.

 

[Waketurbulence]

All true enough. I was simplifying just a little bit to make a simple point, that's all. Spouting off on a web board about not giving someone a ride on jumpseat does hardly qualifies as criminal activity, deserving of being named in a multimillion dollar racketeering case.

That's why after the appeal is lost, the defendants should sue usapa and the individuals that brought these charges!

 

[HPearlyretiree]

Another loss for USAPA.

Change of Venue denied.

If this were a sitcom, we would hear the "wahn waaaaa" sound.

LOL

 

[OTTER574]

Another loss for USAPA.

Change of Venue denied.

"This lawsuit involves the integration of pilot seniority lists upon the merger of US
Airways and America West Airlines, now operating under the name “US Airways†with
headquarters in Tempe, Arizona, and employing thousands of pilots residing in numerous
states across the country. A jury found USAPA breached its duty of fair representation
by abandoning an arbitrated seniority list in favor of a date-of-hire list solely to benefit
one group of pilots at the expense of another. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and money
damages.

Most of the Jones factors are not relevant and do not favor either forum. This
case raises federal questions and will be decided under federal law. Neither side contends
they have unwilling non-party witnesses who must be compelled to testify at trial. Where
agreements were negotiated and the parties’ contacts with the forum have no bearing on
the issues to be decided. Whether the forum is Arizona or Washington, D.C., does not
affect the ease of access to sources of proof.

The two relevant Jones factors, the plaintiff’s choice of forum and the differences
in the costs of litigation in the two forums, favor denying transfer. All six Plaintiffs
reside in the Phoenix area. Plaintiffs are represented by a Phoenix law firm, and
Plaintiffs’ counsel all reside in Arizona. USAPA, headquartered in Charlotte, N.C.,
estimates there are eighty to one hundred witnesses identified, many of whom reside
closer to Washington, D.C., than to Phoenix, but few of whom actually reside in
Washington, D.C. Litigating in Washington, D.C., instead of Arizona, may somewhat
decrease USAPA’s or individual witnesses’ costs, but would substantially increase
Plaintiffs’ costs and deny Plaintiffs their choice of forum. Testimony of dispersed
witnesses may be presented by deposition, if that is more convenient, regardless of the
forum.

Finally, this litigation has proceeded in this forum for nearly a year and a half,
including a lengthy jury trial on liability, numerous and extensive legal rulings, and great
expenditure of judicial resources. The waste of judicial resources from transfer to a
different judge in another district late in the litigation disfavors transfer. It would be a
bad exercise of discretion and likely an abuse of discretion.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Change Venue and
Transfer to Another District, Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (doc. # 622) is denied.
DATED this 21st day of January, 2010.


Neil V. Wake"

Judge Wake smelled a rat known as lee seham/usapa and its founders soon after this case was filed. It will soon be checkmate in the up and coming damages trial against lee seham, steve bradford, mike cleary and the founders of usapa. I include lee seham because HE came up with this scheme and will be defending himself before this is all over.

Interesting story about senior UAL pilots that just won a lawsuit against alpa.....You think usapa/cleary may be a bit worried after what they did to the lcc east pension payout?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi...0,7693019.story

 

[Waketurbulence]

Interesting story about senior UAL pilots that just won a lawsuit against alpa.....You think usapa/cleary may be a bit worried after what they did to the lcc east pension payout?

I would be if I were in their shoe's. It's just another example of how they disregard any type of agreement or contract by changing the rules to whatever suits them.

One can only hope that this catches up with all of them one way or another.

 

[hp_fa]

Since we are, for the purpose of this discussion, thinking outside the box lets think about what would happen if the case were reversed and remanded for some procedural error with instructions to the trial court to remedy the error(s). The case would now be back before Judge Wake, who has since the time of appeal had a change of venue filed with him by USAPA, and they would now be arguing a portion of the case in front of a judge for whom, at best, they have showed disdain. Not a good combination. In the meantime any chance of meaningful contract negotiations again go back to going nowhere. There is no chance that the company would be negotiating any meaningful sections of the contract while the validity of the seniority issues are in the courts. So we have more delay.

I wonder who said that after the change of venue motion was filed....

 

[snapthis]

A loss for USAPA is no surprise. It is expected.

 

[OTTER574]

I would be if I were in their shoe's. It's just another example of how they disregard any type of agreement or contract by changing the rules to whatever suits them.

One can only hope that this catches up with all of them one way or another.

You think Lee Moak and the Delta camp will be kicking fat a#s john prater and his alpa clowns to the curb?

 

[HPDriver]

East contribution is way down.

Wonder if they've figured it out.

Nic is it.

 

[boeingplt]

East contribution is way down.

Wonder if they've figured it out.

Nic is it.

Ye doth protest too much

 

[Metroyet]

A loss for USAPA is no surprise. It is expected.

WHAT!!!??? Another denial from Judge Wake is what THEY EXPECTED THE WHOLE TIME!!!. This is just another "WIN" for USAPA!!! Now USAPA has the West right where they want them!!!! In USAPALAND every loss is a major win...don't you know that yet?

 

[Phoenix]

Ye doth protest too much

Yeah.. AND he doth fish too vigorously with ripples and splashes.

 

[Phoenix]

Just in case anyone doubts what you say, this is from the CEO :

"We have determined that the list submitted meet these criteria, so the company will accept the submitted list"


View attachment 8662

"Implement", "enforce", "execute", "effect", "fulfill", and "complete" are synonyms. "Accept" seems to have been left out of the club.