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

[767jetz]

You like to talk about the fact that the evidence presented is still valid but fail to mention that USAPA was only able to present 10% of its case based on rulings for what evidence was allowed and the fact the Jury instructions almost dictated the outcome rendered.

Actually you are incorrect. I did not fail to mention that. In fact if you read all my recent posts on this matter you will find that what I did say is that a new trial will be subject to new evidence and what a new judge does or does not allow, that there are no guarantees of success on either side, that the findings of facts and depositions from DFR I could be useful to the west, and that IMO USAPA will not be given any greater latitude than it was given the first time. (maybe even less.)

That is what I said.

 

[BoeingBoy]

USAPA better hope that it doesn't get to try the Nic Award - courts give great deference to arbitrator's rulings. Trying to argue that the Nic is unfair is about the same as butting their head against a concrete wall. While trying to find some rationale to "prove" how "unfair" the Nic Award is makes great fodder for a forum like this, it won't carry much if any weight in a DFR trial.

Jim

 

[A320 Driver]

USAPA better hope that it doesn't get to try the Nic Award - courts give great deference to arbitrator's rulings. Trying to argue that the Nic is unfair is about the same as butting their head against a concrete wall. While trying to find some rationale to "prove" how "unfair" the Nic Award is makes great fodder for a forum like this, it won't carry much if any weight in a DFR trial.

Jim

You might be right, but to a lot of people, years of service carry a lot of weight. It may depend on how you present the question.

"Mr John Q. Public, how would YOU like it if an arbitrator placed you junior to someone else with 15 years less seniority?"

See what I mean? Of course, the question only works as a stand alone question. Add in the rest of the issues surrounding it and it becomes a lot less clear. A jury is a funny animal. You just never know. Been on a few and had more than my share of surprises.

Once again, just my opinion.

Driver B)

 

[BoeingBoy]

You might be right, but to a lot of people, years of service carry a lot of weight. It may depend on how you present the question.

"Mr John Q. Public, how would YOU like it if an arbitrator placed you junior to someone else with 15 years less seniority?"

To which the plaintiff's lawyer could ask "Don't you mean longevity? How much more seniority did that 15 years of extra longevity produce?" I keep saying that if anybody should understand that longevity isn't equal to seniority it should be the East pilots. If the two were interchangable, seniority would be a straight line always going up since longevity always increases as time goes by. However, the East has seen the extreme case of seniority decreasing as longevity increases and a few questions would bring out the distinction.

Jim

 

[machflyer]

The jury was deciding the merits of the DFR. The Majority imposing upon the Minority. The Nicolau Award is complete. Your attorneys brought in evidence arguing about senoirity and how your career expectations of being a 767 Int'l Captain were ruined by Nicolau. The very person you chose to decide your fate.

Lets not forget the facinating discertation of Integrity by Sullenberger the Sellout.

The jury stuck to the case. They werent swayed by your 'renegotiating Binding Arbitration'. You are wrong. And will continue to be.



USAPA = Another day closer to age 65 with little money to show for it. Thanks AFO's.

After each thread you write I glance at your avatar and I more often than not think that the woman is very representative of you...
BTW, what's with all the darts that your throwing at Sully? Moderator, comments?

Mike
DOH 1989

 

[nycbusdriver]

Record profits and the East is still the lowest paid pilot group.

Nice job USAPA.


USAPA = Bottom of the barrel and proud.

Had USAPA not had to deal for two years with a premature lawsuit, we would probably be two years closer to a new contract (or have it by now.)

 

[nycbusdriver]

courts give great deference to arbitrator's rulings.

Which courts? Which cases?

 

[luvthe9]

They will, after the DJ plays out. Right now the DJ is the best fast route to resolution. It is to their benefit to see it through. USAPA, not so much. Which is why they are fighting it so hard. As I said before, if the DJ states that the company is not off the hook if they stray from the Nic, it's game over. If not, the west continues with plan A with an injunction and DFR II, if and when there is a DOH contract. Don't worry, it will be easier to understand as things unfold.

so when the 9th says it does not necessarily have to be in the deal, and you say it is. Guess who we believe?

 

[luvthe9]

After each thread you write I glance at your avatar and I more often than not think that the woman is very representative of you...
BTW, what's with all the darts that your throwing at Sully? Moderator, comments?

Mike
DOH 1989

Remember, 80% of these guys and gals learned what they know at Mesa. They don't like it if you flew an F-4......

 

[Metroyet]

so when the 9th says it does not necessarily have to be in the deal, and you say it is. Guess who we believe?

Get on with it then! Why doesn't the company believe as you? Wake didn't either...or the dissenting opinion...or the Jury.

Read whatever makes you happy into the 9th.

 

[hp_fa]

Which courts? Which cases?

Both state courts and federal courts strongly adhere to arbitration rulings when done under any contractual or consensual agreement of the parties.

 

[Phoenix]

The question isn't about the Nic being fair. It's about the ratified list being within a wide range of reasonableness.

You might be right, but to a lot of people, years of service carry a lot of weight. It may depend on how you present the question.

"Mr John Q. Public, how would YOU like it if an arbitrator placed you junior to someone else with 15 years less seniority?"

See what I mean? Of course, the question only works as a stand alone question. Add in the rest of the issues surrounding it and it becomes a lot less clear. A jury is a funny animal. You just never know. Been on a few and had more than my share of surprises.

Once again, just my opinion.

Driver B)

 

[Metroyet]

The question isn't about the Nic being fair. It's about the ratified list being within a wide range of reasonableness.

B.S.

If it were "fair" you wouldn't be in court explaining it. A Jury already found once that you were no where near a "wide range of reasonableness". It isn't reasonable to evade binding arbitration. Deep down I think you all know that.

 

[luvthe9]

Which courts? Which cases?

Here is a court and here is a case. Just wait until the East new hires start coming, and they are coming soon. They'll be voting with us on any and all deals coming. They will get a real education on how if they stick with the East pilots, and this thing is separate ops- they are going to capture all the attrition and movement that is coming down the tracks real soon. They vote with the West? They get jumped on immediately and surrender all the attrition.The longer the west keeps hanging out there with their hopes of stealing with the Nic, the more grave danger they face. It is coming home to roost with each day. 10 new ground school instructors coming in in CLT. What does that say? A lot of new hires will be coming soon. Get your DFR 1,2,3,4,5, ad infinitum. You are going to have a whole new crop of East soldiers that are ready to keep the seniority theft at bay.

 

[Bear96]

Which courts? Which cases?

Seriously? Are you really questioning this basic priniciple?