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

[luvn737s]

Under the RLA the company cannot impose a CBA on workers, only after the Section 6 is exhausted or during bankruptcy after Section 1113 is done.

This would be a side letter to both existing contracts. Imposing Nic without a full joint contract would be a gamble that they could get a judge to rule that USAPA wasn't acting in the spirit of the Trans Agreement if USAPA pursued legal action.

Unclogging the seniority integration takes a PLUMBER!

 

[700UW]

Do you understand the process?

By law the company and the union have to remain status quo, the company cannot sign a side letter without the union agreeing.

 

[HPDriver]

Do you understand the process?

By law the company and the union have to remain status quo, the company cannot sign a side letter without the union agreeing.

With a court's backing, the company can pretty much do what is needed to protect itself.

 

[700UW]

No it cant, the RLA has been the law since 1926, a court cannot change it, I can see you have not been active in a union nor know the process, I have been on Negotiating Committees and was very active in the IAM at US.

Go look up status quo in regard to the RLA.

 

[88 B.T.D.]

Do you understand the process?

By law the company and the union have to remain status quo, the company cannot sign a side letter without the union agreeing.

This IMO is where USAPA messed up. Right after the election, since the parties to first Tran Agr changed from 2 ALPA to 1 USAPA, they should have rewritten the Tran Agr with company stating seniority to be accomplished by union policy (constitution). Would have still been taken to court, but would have been in much better legal position as long as company didn't ask for anything else to change.

 

[700UW]

I guess you dont understand binding arbitration, they cant negotiate it away.

 

[Black Swan]

With a court's backing, the company can pretty much do what is needed to protect itself.

This is absolutely not true.

 

[Black Swan]

Yet another lawsuit an eastie totally misunderstands. You're not going to get your pension back. That isn't what this lawsuit is about. Get educated and get your expectations in line.

You don't get it either. The east group has a pension. It is administered by the PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY ADMIN. PBGC. It just is a different and lower value. The value also varies at the date and time benefits are taken.

 

[Black Swan]

This would be a side letter to both existing contracts. Imposing Nic without a full joint contract would be a gamble that they could get a judge to rule that USAPA wasn't acting in the spirit of the Trans Agreement if USAPA pursued legal action.

Unclogging the seniority integration takes a PLUMBER!

Do you have ANY understanding of the RLA at all? This is ridiculous! How do you get a side letter in LUVN? Maybe that sheriff that puts convicts in tents might go for it.......

 

[CallawayGolf]

This IMO is where USAPA messed up. Right after the election, since the parties to first Tran Agr changed from 2 ALPA to 1 USAPA, they should have rewritten the Tran Agr with company stating seniority to be accomplished by union policy (constitution). Would have still been taken to court, but would have been in much better legal position as long as company didn't ask for anything else to change.

While USAPA's legal counsel tickles their ears and tells them they aren't bound by binding contracts (and anthing else they want to hear), the company isn't so naïve and blinded by raw emotion as USAPA's leadership. I think you can rest assured the company would never have signed a subsequent TA with USAPA knowing the west pilots were already gearing up for a lawsuit before USAPA collected its first dollar in dues. USAPA has made countless tactical and legal blunders, but even I wouldn't accuse them of failing to negotiate a new TA.

 

[cleardirect]

I love irony. It is so… ironic.

For all of you out there screaming that the Addington case is not ripe, I suggest that you check on your other favorite case.

Get back to me on how confident you are about ripeness now and what constitutes when a case is ripe.

The ALANIS MORISSETTE song IRONIC keeps running through my head.


An old man turned ninety-eight
He won the lottery and died the next day
It's a black fly in your Chardonnay
It's a death row pardon two minutes too late
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

It's like rain on your wedding day
It's a free ride when you've already paid
It's the good advice that you just didn't take
Who would've thought... it figures

Mr. Play It Safe was afraid to fly
He packed his suitcase and kissed his kids goodbye
He waited his whole damn life to take that flight
And as the plane crashed down he thought
"Well isn't this nice..."
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

 

[Black Swan]

I love irony. It is so… ironic.

For all of you out there screaming that the Addington case is not ripe, I suggest that you check on your other favorite case.

Get back to me on how confident you are about ripeness now and what constitutes when a case is ripe.

The ALANIS MORISSETTE song IRONIC keeps running through my head.


An old man turned ninety-eight
He won the lottery and died the next day
It's a black fly in your Chardonnay
It's a death row pardon two minutes too late
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

It's like rain on your wedding day
It's a free ride when you've already paid
It's the good advice that you just didn't take
Who would've thought... it figures

Mr. Play It Safe was afraid to fly
He packed his suitcase and kissed his kids goodbye
He waited his whole damn life to take that flight
And as the plane crashed down he thought
"Well isn't this nice..."
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

Wow, so fast one might think it was from memory.............

 

[88 B.T.D.]

I guess you dont understand binding arbitration, they cant negotiate it away.

I guess that is part of the legal question in appeal. It was negotiated in the TA by the "legal bargaining agent". Is it legal or not legal to be written out by a new TA (or CBA in this case) by the current "legal bargaining agent"? Despite all the opinions, mine included, only the appeals court or higher can ultimately say.

 

[Black Swan]

I love irony. It is so… ironic.

For all of you out there screaming that the Addington case is not ripe, I suggest that you check on your other favorite case.

Get back to me on how confident you are about ripeness now and what constitutes when a case is ripe.

The ALANIS MORISSETTE song IRONIC keeps running through my head.


An old man turned ninety-eight
He won the lottery and died the next day
It's a black fly in your Chardonnay
It's a death row pardon two minutes too late
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

It's like rain on your wedding day
It's a free ride when you've already paid
It's the good advice that you just didn't take
Who would've thought... it figures

Mr. Play It Safe was afraid to fly
He packed his suitcase and kissed his kids goodbye
He waited his whole damn life to take that flight
And as the plane crashed down he thought
"Well isn't this nice..."
And isn't it ironic... don't you think

This is one of the strangest responses I have ever heard. I certainly would not admit listening to her........

 

[CallawayGolf]

I guess that is part of the legal question in appeal. It was negotiated in the TA by the "legal bargaining agent". Is it legal or not legal to be written out by a new TA (or CBA in this case) by the current "legal bargaining agent"? Despite all the opinions, mine included, only the appeals court or higher can ultimately say.

The name of the CBA is irrelevant. The pilots elected to be represented by a Collective Bargaining Agent who has the legal authority to act on their party's behalf. If you have your real estate agent make an offer on a house and you change agents before you close, you're are still bound by the agreements you and your agent made. Walk away and you will forfeit your earnest money. This isn't the issue before the 9th circuit anyway, but why don't you cite a case where a party was excused from a legally binding agreement because they changed the agent who represented them when the agreement was made?