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

[exB717Flyer]

I asked you, "Okay, I'll bite. What is the West's "hand" in the mess? Please be specific." To which you answered:

Most people that are not, but see themselves as........"victims", can't see where they had any part of a disagreement.

Nobody ever answered my questions about the west best offers prior to the Nic award. Does that tell you something? Naw, didn't think it would.

Like I said before, if you can't or won't answer just say so.

 

[Pi brat]

Just speculating because you won't answer a direct question when it proves your position is wrong.

I am not a MIGS because USAPA is unfixable and I will not be associated with an organization that was formed to screw the West out of what they are legally and ethically entitled to.

Only the courts or a new union can clean up this mess now.

I'm not smarter than everyone I work with but I do think I'm smarter than you.

There we have it folks. The one that thinks he is smarter than me is not a member and does nothing but complain about the "injustice" he sees. He had no say in the C18 case. He had no vote on the current president. He has no vote on the PIC referendum. He does not even try to have voice and to even try to change the union he says was formed to screw the west.

Next question. Which new union is going to save us and what are YOU doing to see that come about? Let us all know Trader, what are YOU doing except hiding behind your keyboard?

And please tell me you have the integrity to pay your required dues.

 

[RSVP767]

You mean it is not?

Then why are we in front of Wake again?

DENIED! Talk about embarassment for a legal team. You guys really thought you could get your boy Wake to vacate the judgement mandated by the Court of Appeals on the very issue disposed of by the Court of Appeals. PRICELESS!

None of this will be in front of the Honorable Judge Wake much longer.

 

[Pi brat]

Addington might be ripe. In the oral argument of the Rule 60 ( b ) motion he inquired if the Addington plaintiffs had cross-claimed against USAPA in the Declaratory Relief action and was told that they had. So Wake knew he wasn't denying the Addington plaintiffs another day in court, just that absent the SCOTUS accepting Certiorari the Addington folks will now be making their claims as part of the Company's action.

It is interesting that Judge Wake did not yet rule on the transfer motion, especially after USAPA openly accused him of bias in his courtroom. Of course the best they could do to substantiate a bias claim was to say that he had ruled against them numerous times. If you don't believe me, read the transcript when it comes out. Since USAPA already aggravated Judge Silver the very first time they submitted a motion, they may be running out of judges to insult.

I stand corrected. What odds do you give a SCOTUS run?

Doesn't the company's filing prove it isn't ripe? The 9th said Addington's worst fears may never come about and depending on the outcome of the company's filing that seems to be true.

 

[Pi brat]

I asked you, "Okay, I'll bite. What is the West's "hand" in the mess? Please be specific." To which you answered:

Like I said before, if you can't or won't answer just say so.

You know........................

 

[cleardirect]

clear,

Looks like your boy the desert judge is making quick decisions now. Somebody got spanked! Keep the donations coming.

Where is aqua and fergie? Working on a new update?

Hate

You guys do know that every order does not constitute a spanking right.

Here is the order. One went our way one went your way. Is this a co-equal spanking or do you think it is only a spanking when we lose? That when you lose it is proof of bias?

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Rule 60( B ) Motion for Relief from the Judgment Dismissing for Lack of Ripeness (Doc. 645) is denied.
The Court has also reviewed Plaintiffs' Motion to File Supplemental Briefing (Doc. 659) and Defendant USAPA's response.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to File Supplemental Briefing (Doc. 659) is granted.
The Clerk shall file Plaintiffs' Lodged Supplemental Briefing on the Issue of Strict Compliance with Local Rules (Doc. 660).
DATED this 13th day of October, 2010.

I heard judge Wake when through the list of rulings that went in favor of usapa. Did we get spanked the entire trial?

 

[ROACLT]

Addington might be ripe. In the oral argument of the Rule 60 ( b ) motion he inquired if the Addington plaintiffs had cross-claimed against USAPA in the Declaratory Relief action and was told that they had. So Wake knew he wasn't denying the Addington plaintiffs another day in court, just that absent the SCOTUS accepting Certiorari the Addington folks will now be making their claims as part of the Company's action.

It is interesting that Judge Wake did not yet rule on the transfer motion, especially after USAPA openly accused him of bias in his courtroom. Of course the best they could do to substantiate a bias claim was to say that he had ruled against them numerous times. If you don't believe me, read the transcript when it comes out. Since USAPA already aggravated Judge Silver the very first time they submitted a motion, they may be running out of judges to insult.

All roads lead to Rome, all these cases will lead to the 9th Circuit. It doesn't matter what happens at the district level. It's obvious what US Airway's motivation to filing the declaratory judgement complaint is, and it isn't for negotiating expediency. It really doesn't matter what Wake does or doesn't do, if it makes it to the 9th Circuit, the results will come out in favor of USAPA. This burns nothing but time and money, which isn't an issue for US Airways, and time actually saves them money. USAPA can afford it, the real losers again will be the Addington group, as its money out of pocket and money down the drain. Who knows, maybe that is US Airways plan, to get Addington donors to waste another Million. It certainly will make someone taking another blind shot with a second DFR suit in the future think twice and the ability to raise money that much harder.

 

[mikey60]

You may be able to convince yourself that the East pilots' actions aren't harming anyone (i.e. no victims), but just believing a lie doesn't make the lie any more true. The fact is that many thousands of people are directly and negatively affected by the fact that the East pilots refuse to honor their contractual agreements and because USAPA fails to fulfill its obligations to impartially represent all pilots of US Airways. The pilots, flight attendants, and many other employees of US airways have been harmed by the nefarious conduct of the east pilots.

This is another misconception the west has. The other employees of this company from rampers to top management think of pilots as overpaid bus drivers. Yea I know "that can't be, were great everybody loves us" but it 's true and now were not overpaid.

 

[nic4us]

DENIED! Talk about embarassment for a legal team. You guys really thought you could get your boy Wake to vacate the judgement mandated by the Court of Appeals on the very issue disposed of by the Court of Appeals. PRICELESS!

None of this will be in front of the Honorable Judge Wake much longer.

Wake, Silver, yet TBA. Does not matter. Better go read Wake's order agian.

 

[767jetz]

"There's absolutely a fix," he said. "It will take all parties coming together with an open mind and addressing issues. ALPA can help with that."

I saw this quote in an article and it left me scratching my head. What does Moak think ALPA can do for US Airways? Is he positioning himself as the great mediator so when a representational election is held he can bring ALPA back to US? I highly doubt that's an option? I'm really not sure what his angle is.

 

[mikey60]

Perfect description of the majority of East F/Os.

I guess thats why I like the f/o's I fly with so much.

 

[nic4us]

All roads lead to Rome, all these cases will lead to the 9th Circuit. It doesn't matter what happens at the district level. It's obvious what US Airway's motivation to filing the declaratory judgement complaint is, and it isn't for negotiating expediency. It really doesn't matter what Wake does or doesn't do, if it makes it to the 9th Circuit, the results will come out in favor of USAPA. This burns nothing but time and money, which isn't an issue for US Airways, and time actually saves them money. USAPA can afford it, the real losers again will be the Addington group, as its money out of pocket and money down the drain. Who knows, maybe that is US Airways plan, to get Addington donors to waste another Million. It certainly will make someone taking another blind shot with a second DFR suit in the future think twice and the ability to raise money that much harder.

If it does not matter what happens at the district level, why does usapa show up? ....oh wait...Seham didn't...sent Granath to take the beating.

He is as cowardly as he is short. But what would one expect from a weasal that talked a bunch of upset pilots into paying him millions for something he can never get for them. Talk about money down the drain, Seham has cost this pilot group hundreds of million to enrich himself at their expense. But, in the end, he won't get them DOH, and he will likely cost them more in damages assesments.

 

[ROACLT]

If it does not matter what happens at the district level, why does usapa show up? ....oh wait...Seham didn't...sent Granath to take the beating.

He is as cowardly as he is short. But what would one expect from a weasal that talked a bunch of upset pilots into paying him millions for something he can never get for them. Talk about money down the drain, Seham has cost this pilot group hundreds of million to enrich himself at their expense. But, in the end, he won't get them DOH, and he will likely cost them more in damages assesments.

The same reason you raise an objection. First you hope to win the legal point but you also preserve the issue for appeal if needed.

Was a nerve touched, or a little to close to the truth of the matter?

 

[hp_fa]

I stand corrected. What odds do you give a SCOTUS run?

The historic amount of cases accepted by the SCOTUS is 4%. That is probably about right and I would have answered that same question the same way whether it was the Addington plaintiffs or USAPA attemtpint to get the case heard. If the case is heard then it is also historically correct that the rulings of the Court of Appeals is overturned.

Doesn't the company's filing prove it isn't ripe?

No.

The 9th said Addington's worst fears may never come about and depending on the outcome of the company's filing that seems to be true.

Apples and oranges.

The 9th was referring to the possibility that the DFR might not occur. Examples that I can think of that would justify that thought would be a change in direction by USAPA, a change in leadership (and therefore policies) of USAPA or a change of bargaining agent. Any of those things ** could ** happen prior to the case becoming "unquestionably ripe" (the 9th's term) once a contract is ratified following DOH/LOS and not Nicolau.

IMO the company was surprised by the 9th's ruling. They were thinking that the seniority issue was going to be resolved in the Addington v. USAPA case. Once the case was ruled to be not ripe the company had to become involved in order to get, as far as the company is concerned, a resolution of the matter at least to the point that the company is judicially told which of the three options in its Complaint that it must follow in order to absolve itself of liability for damages to either USAPA or the Addington class.

 

[767jetz]

You guys do know that every order does not constitute a spanking right.

Here is the order. One went our way one went your way. Is this a co-equal spanking or do you think it is only a spanking when we lose? That when you lose it is proof of bias?

I pointed out last week that when the legal wind is blowing at the west's back, the west quietly move forward, and things on this forum get awfully quiet on this forum. But when the east perceives even the slightest hint of momentum (however misguided) they come out in droves to yell their favorite word from the roof tops... "SPANKED."

Funny thing is, they don't even read the actual order. One motion denied and one granted. Is this REALLY the definition of a "legal spanking?"

As for your question about co-equal spanking, you are accurate in your assessment of typical confirmation bias.