US Pilots Labor Discussion 3/1- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[cleardirect]

You might also want to review what the North Carolina USAPA backyard federal judge had to say about jurisdiction. If he had not dismissed because USAPA's case was fatally flawed to start he was going to dismiss on lack of subject matter. You might want to look up the term "paucity of allegations" the judge did not think that this case held much legal sway without being flawed to start.



V. PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND VENUE
In addition to the lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the Individual
Defendants argue, as additional grounds for their dismissal, that they are
not subject to personal jurisdiction in North Carolina, as they are not
residents of North Carolina, nor have they had continuous and systematic
contacts in North Carolina such that the exercise of in personam
jurisdiction would be warranted. Further, the Individual Defendants argue
that this matter should be dismissed and/or transferred pursuant Rule
12(B)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for improper venue
because none of the acts alleged in the Amended Complaint are alleged to
have occurred in North Carolina. [Doc. 78].
Having determined that this action should be dismissed on the
grounds that the Plaintiff has failed to state a federal claim and therefore
the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of a federal
question, and further having exercised its discretion in declining to
exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s state-law claims, the
Court need not address the Individual Defendants’ arguments with respect
to personal jurisdiction and venue. If it were necessary to reach such
issues, the Court would have serious concerns as to whether the exercise
44
of in personam jurisdiction over the Individual Defendants would comport
with the requirements of due process. See ESAB Group, Inc. v. Centricut,
Inc., 126 F.3d 617, 626 (4th Cir. 1997) (assertion of jurisdiction over
defendant must be “compatible with due processâ€), cert. denied, 523 U.S.
1048, 118 S.Ct. 1364, 140 L.Ed.2d 513 (1998). Upon reviewing the
Amended Complaint, the Court notes that there is a paucity of allegations
to support the Court’s assertion of jurisdiction over each of the Individual
Defendants. Further, the Court questions whether the actions alleged to
have been committed by these Defendants – the making of phone calls to
USAPA’s hotline and the posting of messages on AWAPPA’s Web Board –
would support a finding that “a substantial part of the events†giving rise to
the Plaintiff’s claims arose in this District. See 28 U.S.C. §1391(B).
Because the Court has dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims based on a lack of
subject matter jurisdiction, however, such issues need not be reached.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Someone is going to be almost clinically depressed if those dominoes tip opposite the way expected...

Jim

And I get the distinct impression you will be overjoyed at such pain being endured by those colleagues who once considered you a friend.

I imagine you have some Dom chilling in the refrigerator in the event those dominoes do tip in the direction for which you seem to so vehemently pray.

 

[cactusboy53]

It is amazing that the West pilots claims of cowardice and integrity disadvantage of the East on a daily basis on this forum, you post one public record that is not an opinion but facts and this soils their reputation.

Part of the public record, click here.

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE



Read the result of these allegations here: http://cactus18.typepad.com/the_cactus_18/files/final.pdf

Millions of dollars in delay tactics. I believe you may soon reap what you have sewn.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

If it were necessary to reach such
issues, the Court would have serious concerns as to whether the exercise
44
of in personam jurisdiction over the Individual Defendants would comport
with the requirements of due process. See ESAB Group, Inc. v. Centricut,
Inc., 126 F.3d 617, 626 (4th Cir. 1997) (assertion of jurisdiction over
defendant must be “compatible with due processâ€), cert. denied, 523 U.S.
1048, 118 S.Ct. 1364, 140 L.Ed.2d 513 (1998). Upon reviewing the
Amended Complaint, the Court notes that there is a paucity of allegations
to support the Court’s assertion of jurisdiction over each of the Individual
Defendants. Further, the Court questions whether the actions alleged to
have been committed by these Defendants – the making of phone calls to
USAPA’s hotline and the posting of messages on AWAPPA’s Web Board –would support a finding that “a substantial part of the events†giving rise to
the Plaintiff’s claims arose in this District. See 28 U.S.C. §1391(.
Because the Court has dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims based on a lack of
subject matter jurisdiction, however, such issues need not be reached.

--BREAK--

There you have it, I don't see any reference to feces, rocks, emails, dolls in nooses, the safety hotline, or anything else that many east posters like to harp on. Straight from the Judge who actually read the case. Absolutely, positively disgusting that usapa would do such a thing to line pilots. Looks like usapa has got a strong case for state court.

 

[HPDriver]

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE



Read the result of these allegations here: http://cactus18.typepad.com/the_cactus_18/files/final.pdf

Millions of dollars in delay tactics. I believe you may soon reap what you have sewn.

Malicious litigation is a tort action.

USAPA will pay.

 

[HPDriver]

And I get the distinct impression you will be overjoyed at such pain being endured by those colleagues who once considered you a friend.

I imagine you have some Dom chilling in the refrigerator in the event those dominoes do tip in the direction for which you seem to so vehemently pray.

I haven't bought any Dom.

But I do plan on buying a round at the CLT overnight when the dominoes do tip. Even for the easties!!

 

[nic4us]

But I do plan on buying the bar at that CLT overnight a round when the dominoes do tip. Even for the easties!!

True story, after a big BPR meeting in CLT, West pilots socializing in the lounge at hotel when Seeham et al enter. After they leave, bartender asks West crew if they knew those guys, because they left without paying their tab! West contingent erupts in laughter and is approached by usapian wanting to know what is so funny. After an explanation, said east pilot graciously pays the bill for the now absent usapa contingent.

Moral of the story, if you offer to buy a round in CLT, make sure you know "whats in your wallet?".

 

[cleardirect]

And I get the distinct impression you will be overjoyed at such pain being endured by those colleagues who once considered you a friend.

I imagine you have some Dom chilling in the refrigerator in the event those dominoes do tip in the direction for which you seem to so vehemently pray.

At what point in time have any of you considered us friends? In the last two and a half years there has been NO friendly words spoken from the east.

I suppose only when you all thought that you were going to staple us to the bottom of your list did you think of us as your furlough fodder friends.

 

[luvn737s]

And I get the distinct impression you will be overjoyed at such pain being endured by those colleagues who once considered you a friend.

I imagine you have some Dom chilling in the refrigerator in the event those dominoes do tip in the direction for which you seem to so vehemently pray.

Won't the real celebration come when the east acknowledges that their tactics are counterproductive and they abandon them in exchange for behavior they can be proud of? The pain is in the rubble of the relationship between pilots east and west. The joy will be in building something stronger and better for both sides and repairing the damage done by a few who saw opportunity to hijack the integration and grab power at the expense of their fellow pilots.

USAPA can no longer sell it's members on the advantages of sifting through the ashes of their integration scheme. It's time to produce the benefits a union is morally and legally obligated to work toward.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

It's awful quiet on the eastern front this morning. They must be hard at work compiling a bunch of bs to baffle everyone with, I imagine they will be here with it shortly.

 

[cubfan]

It's awful quiet on the eastern front this morning. They must be hard at work compiling a bunch of bs to baffle everyone with, I imagine they will be here with it shortly.

most are probably over it all, and will just wait till all decisions come down.

 

[88 B.T.D.]

xxxx chief financial officer admits his company and its pilots' union are "far apart" on a new labor contract.
xxxx argues that its labor costs are higher than for its rivals. CFO xxxx xxxx said Tuesday his company wants pilot costs to be "competitive" with other airlines.

"It's fair to say we are far apart with the pilots' union," xxxxx said at an investor conference in New York.

The pilots' union at one point proposed pay raises of more than 50% to restore their purchasing power to 1992 levels. The company rejected that proposal, and the two sides are currently in negotiations overseen by a federal mediator.




Guess which other company is not negatiating in "good faith"?

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

most are probably over it all, and will just wait till all decisions come down.

Well good, hopefully they'll just wait for that and quit insisting that the cactus 18 are guilty of anything. Which by the way, you and a few of the other east posters never did do, and that is appreciated.

 

[CallawayGolf]

xxxx chief financial officer admits his company and its pilots' union are "far apart" on a new labor contract.
xxxx argues that its labor costs are higher than for its rivals. CFO xxxx xxxx said Tuesday his company wants pilot costs to be "competitive" with other airlines.

"It's fair to say we are far apart with the pilots' union," xxxxx said at an investor conference in New York.

The pilots' union at one point proposed pay raises of more than 50% to restore their purchasing power to 1992 levels. The company rejected that proposal, and the two sides are currently in negotiations overseen by a federal mediator.




Guess which other company is not negatiating in "good faith"?

I've said it all along - asking for a 50 percent raise for the single-largest payroll group in a company that hasn't reported a profit in more than two years isn't negotiating in good faith. No CFO, CEO or BOD is going to agree to anything close to that figure. I seriously doubt USAPA thinks they can negotiate a pay raise on this scale. Rather asking for what you know will never be granted is just another transparent delay tactic for this one-trick pony, disgrace of a union. They've already admitted in federal court that they will never negotiate in good faith for the NIC so this is all just subterfuge anyway.

 

[EastUS]

I've said it all along - asking for a 50 percent raise for the single-largest payroll group in a company that hasn't reported a profit in more than two years isn't negotiating in good faith. No CFO, CEO or BOD is going to agree to anything close to that figure. I seriously doubt USAPA thinks they can negotiate a pay raise on this scale. Rather asking for what you know will never be....

Hmmm...equipped with such a philosophy...there's then no surprise that AWA's historically been the lowest marker in the airline pay index ="Don't even THINK of asking what you're actually worth you fools!"

Cue up the starving young Oliver with porridge bowl in hand...but not daring to actually ask for more.....