US Pilots' Labor Discussion 10/27-11/?

[Reed Richards]

Funny where myths come from.


Funny indeed. But no myth. Keeps saying it enough times here and what you believe "will magically come true."

RR

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Yes, of course. But the bogus calls to USAPA tying up their lines, and the envelopes of excrement have stopped. And that was the point all along. When asked nicely to stop, they didn't. When threatened with legal action, they continued anyway. When the courts got involved, it was like magic. I say, let's keep the magic alive to keep the nonsense at bay.

How does anyone know if the bags of excrement actually happened, other than usapa's say so? The reason being, none of the named defendants did that, and only a few called the recorded info line. You sued the wrong people. That is, if anything was ever sent in the mail in the first place.

 

[Al Legheny]

No problem with the NMB election - it was indeed take it or leave it ("it" being ALPA). My "objection" is to folks claiming that such and such vote was a vote on something it clearly was not a vote on - if something is not on the ballot how can pilot's vote on it?



All well and good, but that doesn't make the vote for/against the changes a "ratification vote on the CBL."



Again, something I never said and never intended to imply. All I was saying is that the union (whatever it's called) is expressly charged with representing all employees in the craft/class in contract related issues but nowhere in USAPA's representational structure is the non-member's presence counted or represented. ALPA handled the issue by having the roll count vote based on pilots assigned to a base, not members. That had the side effect of non-members counting on non-contract issues that were decided by the roll call - a problem. I'm sure other methods could be devised without allowing non-members to vote. But, as I said before, non-members are required to pay the agency fee so their mere presence should count somewhere in the representational chain. Isn't that what they're paying for - representation? They're certainly not paying 90+% of full dues to be told they don't matter. effectivley don't exist.

Jim

Sorry, but that is simply not correct. The ALPA constitution and Bylaws is the same as USAPA in this regard. On a roll call vote the MEC or BPR member votes the number of members in good standing.


SECTION 5 - VOTING
A. On a multi-council airline or an airline having one (1) Local Council subject to Article III, Section 1C, a majority vote
shall be required for election of officers, with each member of the Master Executive Council having one (1) vote.
B. (1) All issues submitted to the Master Executive Council at any meeting shall be decided by a majority vote, with each member having one (1) vote. On issues other than election of officers, a request may be made by any member for a roll call vote.
Each member shall have one (1) vote for each Active member in good standing represented by him, provided that on an airline having one (1) Local Council subject to Article III, Section 1C or Section 1D, each member shall have one-half of the votes for
the Active members in his status and the member who received the largest number of votes in election as Status Representative shall have one (1) additional vote in the event of an odd number of Active members in his status. For the purpose of roll call voting, the Vice President-Administration/Secretary, upon request by the MEC Chairman, shall provide a current report of the number of Active members in good standing represented by each MEC member.
(2) When voting by roll call, a secret ballot shall not be conducted.

ALPA does not allow voting by non-members.

 

[nic4us]

USAPA tried every means to get the nonsense to stop. They threatened legal action if it continued. It continued. And they sued. Why not take it to the end? The pilots involved made their own beds, let them lie in them. They could have stopped their nonsense far short of legal action, but they thought they were dealing with an ALPA-like paper tiger and decided to call USAPA's bluff. They lose. Tough. No one to blame but themselves.\

USAPA takes the hard line a lot. They pull no punches, but they broadcast their intentions well before they launch the blow. This is not ALPA; "sternly worded letters" are no longer the extent of union action. It took a full page ad in the USA Today to make the company understand this. That, too, was money well spent.

Did they sue, or did they maliciously seek criminal prosecution under the RICO act as a form of extortion against an opposing group?

Did they do any research into who they were naming other than having a mole on the AWAPPA web board?

This is the last chance usapa has to drop it, if they wait until they lose the appeal, too late.

Oh, the full page ad was as sophmoric as the usapa leadership and can be considered a true "paper tiger".

 

[Reed Richards]

Did they sue, or did they maliciously seek criminal prosecution under the RICO act as a form of extortion against an opposing group?

Did they do any research into who they were naming other than having a mole on the AWAPPA web board?

This is the last chance usapa has to drop it, if they wait until they lose the appeal, too late.

Oh, the full page ad was as sophmoric as the usapa leadership and can be considered a true "paper tiger".

So let me get this straight...who are the "malicious" ones...those sending feces through the mail and tying up safety hotlines? Or those trying to do the business of the pilots without being shut down by the childish and dangerous actions of a few malcontents?

"Last chance" for what? Good will? See the above sentence, I don't believe pilots who would commit such acts have any good will to save.

I can see why you would not understand the full page ad..after all, none of your International Capts were asked to attend fuel school.

RR

 

[electricjet98]

Indeed you did.

And maybe you should take some of those "donations" and pay off your debt to the legal team you contracted with to help you get out of ALPA the first time..you know..the time you failed and stiffed your lawyers. Who were those lawyers? My memory is not what it used to be.

RR

Hmmm, so this is what it is all about? Sehem feeling that he was not paid appropriatly for his earlier activities with AWAPA, convices USAPA to go after JMac and a few others that only vented their opinions of USAPA? $250k later, Sehem is still collecting on "AWAPA's debt" via his legal fee billing to USAPA. Pretty smart of Sehem...pretty dumb of USAPA!

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

So let me get this straight...who are the "malicious" ones...those sending feces through the mail and tying up safety hotlines? Or those trying to do the business of the pilots without being shut down by the childish and dangerous actions of a few malcontents?


RR
[/quote
None of the named defendants are named for that, not one.

 

[HPDriver]

Funny indeed. But no myth. Keeps saying it enough times here and what you believe "will magically come true."

RR

Great reply.

You asked for the facts and got them. Guess you just can't handle the truth.

 

[cactusboy53]

So let me get this straight...who are the "malicious" ones...those sending feces through the mail and tying up safety hotlines? Or those trying to do the business of the pilots without being shut down by the childish and dangerous actions of a few malcontents?

"Last chance" for what? Good will? See the above sentence, I don't believe pilots who would commit such acts have any good will to save.

I can see why you would not understand the full page ad..after all, none of your International Capts were asked to attend fuel school.

RR

Reed;
The alleged feces charge has never surfaced. The fact remains that a majority of the people named in the RICO lawsuit were such because of statements that they posted on various web sites. Some of the commentary ranged from jumpseats to jointly not paying dues. A very wide range and truly grasping as straws.

I would ask every USAPA member in good standing (ESPECIALLY THOSE IN PHL, CLT, LGA, BOS & DCA): Are you truly willing to allow Cleary and the USAPA spin machine to continue to urinate your dues money on a lawsuit that has been DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE once already? USAPA has THROWN AWAY over $250,000 in our dues money on this WITCH HUNT.

Is it really worth spending another $500,000 or so on this pursuit? Are you willing to gamble that the Cactus 18 won't be able to fight back and counter-sue? The Cactus 18 is funded by a majority of former AWA pilots. We will not let them stand alone, and be bullied by a bunch of knuckle-dragging miscreants.

Further, are you willing to allow USAPA to lead you over the cliff with the DFR appeal & possible track to the SCOTUS?? If the Ninth DENIES USAPA's appeal, do you really think that SCOTUS will even hear your argument. Now you are talking over 2.5 MILLION DOLLARS of your dues money that has already been urinated away.......and that is BEFORE a damages trial (set for just after the first of the year). That could lead to MILLIONS of dollars of damages.....that would turn into ASSESSMENTS......You know what happens when you don't pay ASSESSMENTS??? You get fired.

The USAPA train has left the station. It is up to you to pull the cord and stop the train before it is entirely too late. It's kind of like a bank robbery....You may not have robbed the bank, but if you are in the get-away car you are still guilty by aiding and abetting the criminal involved.

Instead of drawing a line in the sand, why don't you consider joining a new silent majority? We can unseat those that are leading this train wreck. We can together move this pilot body to a joint contract that will protect the pilots of THE NEW US AIRWAYS in the next merger (because....we all know that will happen sooner than later). Go to: www.cactuspilot.com

 

[BoeingBoy]

ALPA does not allow voting by non-members.

That's what I get for not holding on to my copy of the ALPA CBL all those years. Do you know if the same applied in the MEC policy manual? As you know (or maybe not) the MEC's have wide latitude as long as they don't set rules more restrictive than the CBL.

Jim

 

[Reed Richards]

Great reply.

You asked for the facts and got them. Guess you just can't handle the truth.

I was not "asking" for the facts. Pesky money problems seem to be popping up everywhere.... except at USAPA. I can only wonder how it will all turn out. Perhaps the end game is closer than we all thought. Money talks and..well, you know.

RR

 

[Reed Richards]

That's what I get for not holding on to my copy of the ALPA CBL all those years. Do you know if the same applied in the MEC policy manual? As you know (or maybe not) the MEC's have wide latitude as long as they don't set rules more restrictive than the CBL.

Jim

In his usual manipulative fashion, Paul Rice would publish a once a month list of "roll call" numbers to be used at U. I asked him face to face once why the numbers never seemed to come out on the same day...often delayed until the end of a MEC meeting. Small changes in MIGS often changed the swing of votes. He only smiled.

Of course USAPA does not agree with the "calling of lunch" process of Roll Call voting, our CBL looks nothing like ALPA’s in that regard..but it was indeed members and only members that voted, and counted at ALPA. No adjustment in the policy manual. I was pretty sure of this, but also had not looked at my UOM notes. Thanks to Al for his due diligence.

RR

 

[USA320Pilot]

When an East pilot decides whether or not they want to support the new $540 per year USAPA Pension Investigation Assessment they should consider the DB Plan had a future payment into the plan problem not an asset problem. In 2004 and 2005 US Airways was required to deposit $400 mllion and $300 million into the plan, respectively, which was not going to be approved in the POR by the Creditors and Judge Mitchell.

Did the company want to take the plan into termination? According to R&I Committee members the answer was "yes". And, ALPA R&I, the MECs R&I Committee, and the majority of the MEC
knew it in the fall of 2002 the DB Plan would fail. In fact, TPG recognized this and pulled out of being the company's Equity Plan Investor, which proved to be smarter than RSA.

For those who really want to understand what happened to DB Plans I encourage you to read the book "Pension Dumping, The Reasons, The Wreckage, The stakes For Wall Street" by Fran Hawthorne. Chapter 10 and 11 are about the US Airways pilot's DB Plan. The book can be obtained at Amazon.com for about $20.

Hawthorne clearly indicates why US Airways' pilots lost the DB Plan, not poor investment decisions by some Fund Managers of the Master Trust in a bear market.

Maybe the Officers, BPR, and Pension Investigation Committee should read this book.

I believe a better use of pilot income would not be a $270 and two $540 assessments, which will do nothing but pay USAPA attorney David Butler $100,000 per month and the Pension Investigation Committee FPL so they do not have to fly the line, but instead this could be used to help find a way to prevent 165 East and 35 West furloughs.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[aquagreen73s]

Pesky money problems seem to be popping up everywhere.... except at USAPA. I can only wonder how it will all turn out.

Not out West...got plenty of fuel to make it to the damages trial, but the 1.X million from USAPA will surely be welcomed! And if you're wondering how it will turn out, then you're missing the obvious. When you can't stop yourself from voting everything away, and then you try to use your majority status to take what little you can from the the smaller guy, what that means is that you stand for nothing. Ergo, you deserve to lose everything.

 

[USA320Pilot]

I believe it is dead wrong for USAPA to use its dues monies to sue 18 West pilots. This lawsuit is creating an even deeper divide between East and West pilots and will do nothing to bring the parties together. USAPA is intentionally trying to hurt pilots who do not agree with the Officer and BPR 's agenda.

USAPA's actions are causing the West pilots to hate the union even more and is giving the West pilots even more motivation to fight USAPA with a motion to seek legal fees, a trial seeking damages for the DFR conviction, and a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals victory.

When pilots fight pilots no pilot wins!

Regards,

USA320Pilot