US Pilots Labor Discussion 10/13-- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[CallawayGolf]

I agree with your statement above. There is no good reason why Management can not close every other section of the contract, while the Section 22 contention goes through the process of solution.

There’s a very good reason. Management doesn’t trust USAPA who has a history of violating contracts, unfairly representing their own membership, bringing criminal law suits against their members with no evidence to support such charges, asking management to fire pilots for not paying dues to the organization that was formed to steal their jobs, telling federal justices that they are biased for ruling against them, making unreasonable demands in contract negotiations, taking out stupid newspaper ads in order to make management look bad for no good reason, and generally being out of their league or in over their heads when it comes to business dealings and proper business decorum. Management is well justified in keeping USAPA at a distance until they show that they are ready to negotiate in good faith.

Of course USAPA could easily get management’s attention if they had even a minuscule amount of leverage to operate/negotiate with. Leverage requires pilot unity and there is no unity within the pilot ranks so Management will just let USAPA flounder until they come to their senses. Of course we all know how fast USAPA would straighten up and fly right if Judge Silver tells Management to accept USAPA’s DOH proposal. Suddenly there would be a fervent amount of attention given to the JCBA and USAPA wouldn’t come in making unreasonable demands because they would then actually want to send a TA out for ratification. Until then, USAPA has no interest in the such an agreement and Management knows it.

Don’t blame Management for the intentional and self-inflicted failings of USAPA.

 

[BoeingBoy]

He actually said that the two sides should have compromised when ALPA was the CBA. You'll remember that both sides had someone enpowered to reach a compromise back then. With the election of USAPA and it's definition of compromise being "You'll get what we're willing to give you and nothing else" the opportunity for compromise ceased to exist.

Jim

 

[GorgeousGeorge]

There’s a very good reason. Management doesn’t trust USAPA who has a history of violating contracts, unfairly representing their own membership, bringing criminal law suits against their members with no evidence to support such charges, asking management to fire pilots for not paying dues to the organization that was formed to steal their jobs, telling federal justices that they are biased for ruling against them, making unreasonable demands in contract negotiations, taking out stupid newspaper ads in order to make management look bad for no good reason, and generally being out of their league or in over their heads when it comes to business dealings and proper business decorum. Management is well justified in keeping USAPA at a distance until they show that they are ready to negotiate in good faith.

Of course USAPA could easily get management’s attention if they had even a minuscule amount of leverage to operate/negotiate with. Leverage requires pilot unity and there is no unity within the pilot ranks so Management will just let USAPA flounder until they come to their senses. Of course we all know how fast USAPA would straighten up and fly right if Judge Silver tells Management to accept USAPA’s DOH proposal. Suddenly there would be a fervent amount of attention given to the JCBA and USAPA wouldn’t come in making unreasonable demands because they would then actually want to send a TA out for ratification. Until then, USAPA has no interest in the such an agreement and Management knows it.

Don’t blame Management for the intentional and self-inflicted failings of USAPA.

You need to read what you write because everything you said basically says your management is in control. So how could USAPA get sued for delaying when you just made the case that management is setting the agenda? Oh USAPA could get sued, its America but those suits would be a waste and frivolous and you just validated the prior posts with your rant.

 

[No Land Green]

He actually said that the two sides should have compromised when ALPA was the CBA. You'll remember that both sides had someone enpowered to reach a compromise back then. With the election of USAPA and it's definition of compromise bding "You'll get what we're willing to give you and nothing else" the opportunity for compromise ceased to exist.

Jim

Hi Jim,

I just talked to a Wye River participant. There was no compromise on the West side of the room according to him. He does not like USAPA, so was he lying to me?

Let's say he wasn't, so compromise doesn't come from ALPA or USAPA or Management, it will ONLY come from the two Pilot Groups.

 

[CallawayGolf]

You need to read what you write because everything you said basically says your management is in control. So how could USAPA get sued for delaying when you just made the case that management is setting the agenda? Oh USAPA could get sued, its America but those suits would be a waste and frivolous and you just validated the prior posts with your rant.

Re-read my post - check.

Management is in control so long as USAPA negotiates in bad faith and provides no leverage to move the process to a successful conclusion. Management can point back to the Kirby proposal as their last best offer to bring a new JCBA to the pilots. Has USAPA made a reasonable counter offer to this proposal? If not this will not look too good for USAPA at NMB time. Neither will putting out proposals that are impossible for Management to accept.

If USAPA can be shown to have negotiated in bad faith, then damages may be forthcoming. At any rate a strong union has power and some level of control in their relations with Management. A weak union has none. I think we all know what kind of union USAPA is - no unity, no union, no power.

 

[GorgeousGeorge]

Re-read my post - check.

Management is in control so long as USAPA negotiates in bad faith and provides no leverage to move the process to a successful conclusion. Management can point back to the Kirby proposal as their last best offer to bring a new JCBA to the pilots. Has USAPA made a reasonable counter offer to this proposal? If not this will not look too good for USAPA at NMB time. Neither will putting out proposals that are impossible for Management to accept.

If USAPA can be shown to have negotiated in bad faith, then damages may be forthcoming. At any rate a strong union has power and some level of control in their relations with Management. A weak union has none. I think we all know what kind of union USAPA is - no unity, no union, no power.

USAPA has proposals on the table for most if not all sections. All in line with "industry average", not industry leading. The mediator assigned to the case has stated she views things from an "industry standard" perspective. So, what you consider reasonable is irrelevant. US Airways operates in a competitive industry overlapping its routes with many carriers, most if not all of the carriers are at the "average asks" of USAPA or higher. Spirit, an "ultra LCC" has negotiated pay rates that far exceed the Kirby proposal.

So by going to an "industry average" ask position, the argument for stalling and the burden of picking up the pace would rest on your company's shoulders not USAPA. Your own management has insisted that seniority is a union matter, that as long as the result doesn't create excessive training costs, they could care less as to composition. Funny, how they consider a union matter and the 9th circuit refers to it as a internal union affair.

How would you propose to make it a strong union? If you use the argument that 1700 west pilots would never support striking or work action over the USAPA's seniority proposal, the equal argument is that 2000 or more pilots would never support a strike or work action for a contract that includes Nicalou. If you want to use the argument that a top dollar contract with all the trimmings would convince enough East pilots to vote for Nicalou, then the same argument could be made in the opposite. Those are zero sum arguments.

All the union can do is look at the current contracts, and bargaining positions of other pilot groups to craft "industry average" asks which this particular mediator says she gives great weight to, let the process run its course and the mediator move it along. If you are looking for some 5000 pilot unity solution, no one can provide that, USAPA, ALPA, or Jesus Christ. Section 22 will be decided by the courts. USAPA feels it has already been decided, and US Airways complaint, or portion's there of run afoul of the Ninth Circuit's ruling and have crafted motion to stay and dismiss the complaint accordingly because they view it as a delaying tactic.

You do nothing but rant, throwout some specious moral opinion argument and expect people not to see right though it.

 

[No Land Green]

USAPA has proposals on the table for most if not all sections. All in line with "industry average", not industry leading. The mediator assigned to the case has stated she views things from an "industry standard" perspective. So, what you consider reasonable is irrelevant. US Airways operates in a competitive industry overlapping its routes with many carriers, most if not all of the carriers are at the "average asks" of USAPA or higher. Spirit, an "ultra LCC" has negotiated pay rates that far exceed the Kirby proposal.

So by going to an "industry average" ask position, the argument for stalling and the burden of picking up the pace would rest on your company's shoulders not USAPA. Your own management has insisted that seniority is a union matter, that as long as the result doesn't create excessive training costs, they could care less as to composition. Funny, how they consider a union matter and the 9th circuit refers to it as a internal union affair.

How would you propose to make it a strong union? If you use the argument that 1700 west pilots would never support striking or work action over the USAPA's seniority proposal, the equal argument is that 2000 or more pilots would never support a strike or work action for a contract that includes Nicalou. If you want to use the argument that a top dollar contract with all the trimmings would convince enough East pilots to vote for Nicalou, then the same argument could be made in the opposite. Those are zero sum arguments.

All the union can do is look at the current contracts, and bargaining positions of other pilot groups to craft "industry average" asks which this particular mediator says she gives great weight to, let the process run its course and the mediator move it along. If you are looking for some 5000 pilot unity solution, no one can provide that, USAPA, ALPA, or Jesus Christ. Section 22 will be decided by the courts. USAPA feels it has already been decided, and US Airways complaint, or portion's there of run afoul of the Ninth Circuit's ruling and have crafted motion to stay and dismiss the complaint accordingly because they view it as a delaying tactic.

You do nothing but rant, throwout some specious moral opinion argument and expect people not to see right though it.

WELL SAID!!!!!!!!! YOU NAILED IT!!!!!!!! Sorry for yelling.

 

[kubotapilot]

hmmmmmmmm....



USAPA Legal Update

Judge Wake Denies Addington Plaintiffs' Transfer Request

Today, October 19, 2010, The Honorable Neil V. Wake of the federal district court in Phoenix issued an order denying the Addington plaintiffs' request to transfer the Company’s recently filed declaratory judgment action from Judge Silver, to whom the case was randomly assigned, to Judge Wake.
On July 26, 2010, US Airways filed a declaratory judgment action. That case was randomly assigned to the Honorable Roslyn Silver. On July 27, 2010, the Addington plaintiffs filed a motion with Judge Wake requesting that he transfer the Company's newly filed declaratory judgment action to himself. USAPA opposed that motion. Oral argument discussing the merits of plaintiffs' motion was held on Tuesday, October 12 in Phoenix.
Today, less than one week after arguments were heard, Judge Wake has denied plaintiffs' motion to transfer the US Airways' action to his court – that case will remain with and be heard by Judge Roslyn Silver. In today's Order, Judge Wake agreed with USAPA and denied the motion based on the plain language of the local rule governing transfers in the district of Arizona. That rule plainly requires that both cases be "pending" before a transfer can be granted. There is no currently pending case before Judge Wake because, in his words, the "Addington proceedings are concluded."
Plaintiffs had mistakenly relied on only one case to support their contention that both matters need not be pending to support a transfer. Judge Wake rejected plaintiffs' misplaced reliance on that case, noting that the case "does not so hold." Judge Wake was also apparently not persuaded by plaintiffs' supplemental briefing entered only hours after oral argument had concluded. Finally, Judge Wake explained the legal effect that the Ninth Circuit mandate has on his prior rulings by noting that, "the substantive rulings in Addington have been vacated pursuant to mandate, and both cases would now write on clean slates if there were anything to write in Addington, which there is not."
A copy of today's Order denying plaintiffs' motion to transfer can be located in USAPA's Legal Library.
USAPA Legal

 

[CallawayGolf]

USAPA has proposals on the table for most if not all sections. All in line with "industry average", not industry leading. The mediator assigned to the case has stated she views things from an "industry standard" perspective. So, what you consider reasonable is irrelevant. US Airways operates in a competitive industry overlapping its routes with many carriers, most if not all of the carriers are at the "average asks" of USAPA or higher. Spirit, an "ultra LCC" has negotiated pay rates that far exceed the Kirby proposal.

So by going to an "industry average" ask position, the argument for stalling and the burden of picking up the pace would rest on your company's shoulders not USAPA. Your own management has insisted that seniority is a union matter, that as long as the result doesn't create excessive training costs, they could care less as to composition. Funny, how they consider a union matter and the 9th circuit refers to it as a internal union affair.

How would you propose to make it a strong union? If you use the argument that 1700 west pilots would never support striking or work action over the USAPA's seniority proposal, the equal argument is that 2000 or more pilots would never support a strike or work action for a contract that includes Nicalou. If you want to use the argument that a top dollar contract with all the trimmings would convince enough East pilots to vote for Nicalou, then the same argument could be made in the opposite. Those are zero sum arguments.

All the union can do is look at the current contracts, and bargaining positions of other pilot groups to craft "industry average" asks which this particular mediator says she gives great weight to, let the process run its course and the mediator move it along. If you are looking for some 5000 pilot unity solution, no one can provide that, USAPA, ALPA, or Jesus Christ. Section 22 will be decided by the courts. USAPA feels it has already been decided, and US Airways complaint, or portion's there of run afoul of the Ninth Circuit's ruling and have crafted motion to stay and dismiss the complaint accordingly because they view it as a delaying tactic.

You do nothing but rant, throwout some specious moral opinion argument and expect people not to see right though it.

Working backwards – can you show me a national system or a moral code of any kind that claims that breaking a contract/covenant is a morally acceptable or praised form of conduct? If not, then how is my argument specious?

The pilots of US Airways could be come together in a unified fashion if all (or most) pilots personally decided to honor and support the results of binding arbitration, even if they don’t agree with it. The same cannot be said of using DOH (west capitulation) because the company has refused to accept this system and all it takes is one pilot (east or west ) to bring a DFR charge against USAPA and it could potentially derail any agreement made between USAPA and Management. However, a DFR claim would be utterly baseless if the NIC was used for section 22 because of the process that was followed to get it. NIC is already accepted and ready to go. USAPA been trying to avoid the NIC since they were installed as the CBA and every day they push for this in lieu of the NIC is unquestionably a delay tactic.

USAPA is asking for “industry average” contract terms. Fine. What leverage do they have or what are they willing to offer Management in order to get those rates and benefits? Or, is USAPA’s crack negotiating team only skilled at calculating industry averages (something any monkey can do) but incapable of negotiating to get them? Is that where pilots dues are going – researching industry averages and then expecting management to buy into those because USAPA thinks they should? How naive is USAPA when it comes to professional negotiations? Even if the utopian dream of industry average is granted by the NMB (doubtful) and agreed to by Management (very doubtful), it won’t be because of anything USAPA did other than ride the gravy train all the way to the NMB.

USAPA is a failure, plain and simple – and the blame falls squarely on the majority of the east pilots for their failings.

 

[luvthe9]

I don't really see that there's anything to gloat about. Having the case heard by Wake was just an opportunity for entertainment, watching the USAPA circus tap dance in Wake's courtroom again. Wake or Silver, doesn't really matter. The company's case goes forward one way or another. If it is dismissed, then USAPA wins some breathing room, and I'm sure the gloating will commence. That is, until they find out that the company will still stick with Nic.

IMO Silver is probably a better option simply because it denies USAPA one more thing to whine about if it doesn't go their way. I still haven't heard any explanations from the east as to why they are opposing the case in the first place, since around here many claim it is just a stalling tactic, the outcome of which is already predetermined.

Nothing at all like a tap dance. The noose gets tighter every day,The Nic is walking up the steps to the gallows with a smile on its face. Pretty soon, the floor is going to fall away. The Nic will shortly be dead. Then the west will fall back to DFR number whatever. To no avail.

 

[No Land Green]

Working backwards – can you show me a national system or a moral code of any kind that claims that breaking a contract/covenant is a morally acceptable or praised form of conduct? If not, then how is my argument specious?

The pilots of US Airways could be come together in a unified fashion if all (or most) pilots personally decided to honor and support the results of binding arbitration, even if they don’t agree with it. The same cannot be said of using DOH (west capitulation) because the company has refused to accept this system and all it takes is one pilot (east or west ) to bring a DFR charge against USAPA and it could potentially derail any agreement made between USAPA and Management. However, a DFR claim would be utterly baseless if the NIC was used for section 22 because of the process that was followed to get it. NIC is already accepted and ready to go. USAPA been trying to avoid the NIC since they were installed as the CBA and every day they push for this in lieu of the NIC is unquestionably a delay tactic.

USAPA is asking for “industry average” contract terms. Fine. What leverage do they have or what are they willing to offer Management in order to get those rates and benefits? Or, is USAPA’s crack negotiating team only skilled at calculating industry averages (something any monkey can do) but incapable of negotiating to get them? Is that where pilots dues are going – researching industry averages and then expecting management to buy into those because USAPA thinks they should? How naive is USAPA when it comes to professional negotiations? Even if the utopian dream of industry average is granted by the NMB (doubtful) and agreed to by Management (very doubtful), it won’t be because of anything USAPA did other than ride the gravy train all the way to the NMB.

USAPA is a failure, plain and simple – and the blame falls squarely on the majority of the east pilots for their failings.

Let's just say for arguments sake the court determines that USAPA is free to negotiate seniority in any way they see fit. Do you really have a DFR in regards to seniority? Someone has to make a legal decision if Nic lives outside of ALPA. Didn't the ALPA Lawyer who represented the West say that the Nic was a "bargaining position"? If it wasn't, then why did ALPA sponsor Wye River? Why is Lee Moak now eluding that there is a solution. For that matter isn't every proposal put on the table by either Management or the CBA a "bargaining position" until it is TA'd and ratified?

There are days where I'm starting to believe that certain people would Vote for an LOA 93 Contract just to get a Nic number. I'm sure Parker and Kirby would fully agree to that. There is much more to this than Section 22 and the rewards it may or may not bring for certain individuals.

 

[hp_fa]

USAPA Legal Update

Judge Wake Denies Addington Plaintiffs' Transfer Request

Finally, Judge Wake explained the legal effect that the Ninth Circuit mandate has on his prior rulings by noting that, "the substantive rulings in Addington have been vacated pursuant to mandate, and both cases would now write on clean slates if there were anything to write in Addington, which there is not."

That clean slate does not nullify any sworn factual statements, testimony or sworn affidavits. Judge Silver will get to make rulings as she sees fit, but any testimony or affidavits had best not differ from anything that was sworn to be true in the Addington v. USAPA case.

 

[nic4us]

Nobody is gloating over here, the only circus to watch is the west attorneys, if I was a westie I would be pretty ticked off wasting money on these guys. I felt embarrased for them last time it was a pitiful display in front of Wake, gees we even sent our third sting team last time. the company will not use the NIC that's another no brainer, that would be the end of this place. but you go on and put your spin on things that's what you do best.

First, your entire legal team is third string. Your "union" is unranked.

Second, haven't wasted a dime on the West yet. Where is that DOH contract usapa promised during the election?

Third, if the use of the Nic causes LCC's demise, so be it. But I think a threat coming from a group that does not keep its word has very little scare value. Unlike the $100s of millions the West would take from LCC for their collusion with usapa, now there is a threat that would bring down the house, or at least bring it to a courtroom...oh..look..we are there now.

 

[luvthe9]

First, your entire legal team is third string. Your "union" is unranked.

Second, haven't wasted a dime on the West yet. Where is that DOH contract usapa promised during the election?

Third, if the use of the Nic causes LCC's demise, so be it. But I think a threat coming from a group that does not keep its word has very little scare value. Unlike the $100s of millions the West would take from LCC for their collusion with usapa, now there is a threat that would bring down the house, or at least bring it to a courtroom...oh..look..we are there now.

If ours is third says a lot for yours you have have won squat.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Let's just say for arguments sake the court determines that USAPA is free to negotiate seniority in any way they see fit. Do you really have a DFR in regards to seniority? Someone has to make a legal decision if Nic lives outside of ALPA. Didn't the ALPA Lawyer who represented the West say that the Nic was a "bargaining position"? If it wasn't, then why did ALPA sponsor Wye River? Why is Lee Moak now eluding that there is a solution. For that matter isn't every proposal put on the table by either Management or the CBA a "bargaining position" until it is TA'd and ratified?

There are days where I'm starting to believe that certain people would Vote for an LOA 93 Contract just to get a Nic number. I'm sure Parker and Kirby would fully agree to that. There is much more to this than Section 22 and the rewards it may or may not bring for certain individuals.

For the sake of argument - - okay I’ll go along with that. If Judge Silver or whichever court ultimately comes out with an unequivocal and definitive ruling giving USAPA and management permission to vacate the NIC, then I would agree (for sake of argument remember) that the NIC would be dead at that point. If that message is delivered by the court then I believe Management will abide by their statements that seniority is up to the union to determine the methods and the process. However, unless the courts give USAPA total legal freedom from the TA (very doubtful),then USAPA will likely still not succeed in getting DOH as that system would have to meet with the terms and conditions elucidated by the TA about how the two groups are merged.

I personally have no idea what Moak is doing or why ALPA sponsored Wye River. Moak displayed his narcissistic nature during the US bid for Delta so I wouldn’t put much credence into him ever having a rational, others focused thought. I’d also bet in hindsight that ALPA wouldn’t have tried the Wye River approach if they had it to do all over again. All it did was fuel the flames whereby the east pilots think they can avoid binding arbitration. Bad move really.

I seriously doubt many, most, all west pilots would vote for a pay reduction to get the NIC in the next CBA. However, at this rate both pilot groups will be on their current contracts and pay scales for a long, long time to come. However, you can count the number of times the east pilots have shot themselves in the foot by determining how many bullets they had available. Give them more bullets and they will fire away at their own feet or other appendages with reckless abandon.