US Pilots Labor Discussion 3/11- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[Flippin43]

The maximum disparity was 7 years. In general, we had a much closer spread demographically. The average age difference between the two groups was 2 years.

I am sure that the NWA pilots would have been upset if the differences were larger. However, there was a reason why there was such a disparity between your two groups and that reason is pretty obvious. As a 1988 hire at Delta I was stovepiped in as an international wide body captain. I am pretty sure that a 1988 hire at Airways was somewhere in the right seat, probably a narrow body right seat, probably an A320 right seat. The purpose of a combined seniority list is to recognize the current reality and not to make up for past hardships. US Air had been a failing carrier for a long time prior to the merger. You can call me names, but those are the facts.

The arbitrators had only one standard to follow: fair and equitable, just like Nicolau did. They both made adjustments to the list based on longevity. For Airways pilots they got the top 500 numbers, when in fact they should have had much less in a standard status and category methodology. That moved up the entire rest of the active pilot group in relation to the rest of the stovepipe. The arbitration panel in our case saw that that methodology would not have been fair so they chose another method to recognize longevity as a factor.

I don't know if they were trying to avoid a debacle like the LCC case. Pilot groups have been unhappy with arbitration cases for many years but only one has tried to overturn the results. In our case we had the joint contract done before the list was done so we had list integration from day one. Our arbitration award was in December and in January we had a single MEC. Since then we have signed 4 letters of agreement and each one has provided additional contract benefits to our group.

The NWA pilots have gotten tremendous financial gains from the merger already. For instance a 757 captain now makes what a 747-200 captain made prior to the merger. He doesn't have to wait for some future attrition to start cashing those checks. Basically, every NWA pilot has gotten a raise equivalent to moving up two seats. How many retirements would that take for the entire list to achieve that result? How many years would that take?

Obviously, I think that the Airways pilots have set off on a fool's errand. They could have already been reaping the rewards of higher pay if they hadn't popped a cork when the arb award was announced.

I understand the shortcomings of the Kirby proposal, but that was step 1 of a long process that would have resulted in a much better contract than the Kirby proposal. The East MEC was ignorant for pulling out of joint negotiations. USAPA has turned into a joke in my opinion. Their actions can only be described as bungling. They have done nothing to unify their group and in fact seem to relish in the disunity and turmoil. Your lawyers are either incompetent or are milking you for millions.

There is no way you will be able to overturn that arbitration award. Why would the company agree to modify the seniority list to advantage one group over another and face being sued for damages? It has been shown that even if you win in the 9th on ripeness, you can then only delay the DFR case until some point in the future. You can sit around and wait for some attrition to kick in, but you don't know what the landscape will be like 5 or 10 years from now. In this business it is better to get your money now rather than wait for some far off hope of getting seat movement.

I know the East pilots will flame on me, I don't really care because none of this matters. You will change when you want to change or when you have been beaten down enough that you have to change. Either way, change will come. How hard the intervening time is up to you all. For your sake, I hope you change sooner rather than later.

Oscar,

You keep talking to these guys like that, they will never answer another of your posts. They will probably totally ignore this one. The truth is not what they want to hear. Especially if its coming from someone they cant accuse of being in diapers when they were teaching Chuck Yeager etc.

Flip

 

[veritasaequitas]

Have you paid any attention to the topic of judicial activism over the last 50 years?

Yes. What would be your point, sir?

 

[aquagreen73s]

What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape? Remember that? It was not a hypothetical, it was case history. It answers Judge Graber's Question.

He pointed out the footnote in Ramey which clarified the difference between statute of limitations and ripeness. Ramey was a limitations case, but elsewhere the Ramey court talks about ripeness as a matter of law beginning on or berfore limitations. It's an important point and it certainly helps that Judge Tashima is aware of the footnote. Jacob was searching for the case and the court said not to worry about the matter any further (ergo, no need to discuss the issue further, so don't bother looking).

 

[veritasaequitas]

What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape? Remember that? It was not a hypothetical, it was case history. It answers Judge Graber's Question.

I am sorry I did not make myself clear enough. What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape? I appreciate your attempt at a 28j answer, but it did not provide the answer to my question.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Yes. What would be your point, sir?

Simply answering your question about the requirement for judges to be impartial. The Constitution requires it but it also relies on the judges themselves to exercise their impartiality. Some do this well. Others see their appointment to the bench as an opportunity to push agendas that the legislative branch never could because the public would vote them out of office. The ninth has the worst reputation for this so in that sense you out to be quite happy that this lawsuit was filed in AZ rather than in some other jurisdiction.

 

[cleardirect]

I am sorry I did not make myself clear enough. What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape? I appreciate your attempt at a 28j answer, but it did not provide the answer to my question.

Aqua did answer your question. The pause was the lawyer looking for the exact quote in the paperwork, not that he did not have an answer. Better to get it right than to be quick.

Did you just learn a new term? 28j.

Have you read the response from Seham to those 28j letters?

Have you seem the response from the court to those 28j letters?

In case you have not the court allowed the first letter because judge Tashima asked about it. The second letter has not been ruled on in three months. I would say that is not a problem.

Keep grabbing at straws they are getting smaller all the time.

 

[Flippin43]

He was describing our airline "long" before the merger - a time before you were probably an airline pilot

In any case, what does our perceived or actual proximity to liquidation have to do with the integration of two pilot lists - if you were implying that it is relevant.

And my mom never said such a thing.

KV,

It has alot to do with it. A reference to the old Alpa merger policy and the revised policy and even your beloved usapa has in it these words.

CAREER EXPECTATIONS

Absent the merger you didn't have them. (and no I'm not suggesting anyone saved you either, I dont' by in to that) The rest of the world sees this and Nicolau did too.


Flip

 

[aquagreen73s]

I am sorry I did not make myself clear enough. What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape? I appreciate your attempt at a 28j answer, but it did not provide the answer to my question.

Well, not being Andy Jacob and not being at the arguments, I can only go by the context. I heard the question, knew what Judge Tashima was referencing and it was a good question as we needed that point about the ripeness/limitations distinction to directly connect Ramey to our case. Andy appeared to be shuffling through some papers looking for the text of the footnote before answering, and then the judges just moved on to the next question. I don't recall anyone on the bench actually saying "forget about it," but they just sort of moved on after about 15 seconds.

The fact that the Ramey court included such a footnote underscores the utility of their opinion; they really thought their case through and they authored an opinion that would be useful to other plaintiffs later on even outside of the exact issue before them of limitations. There's plenty of other case law out there which spells out the "ripeness begins on or before limitations" rule, but it's certainly helpful that the Ramey court inserted that into their opinion even though ripeness wasn't the issue. The Ramey court effectively made their opinion useful in both limitations cases and ripeness cases; one stop shopping.

 

[veritasaequitas]

Jacob was searching for the case and the court said not to worry about the matter any further (ergo, no need to discuss the issue further, so don't bother looking).

Judge Tashima asked a direct question and your attorney paused for quite a long time and apologized to the court for this pause. You say the court at that point said not to worry about the matter. Ok.

 

[veritasaequitas]

I heard the question,

I asked in many previous posts;

"What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape?" I do not believe you answered me yet.

 

[veritasaequitas]

Simply answering your question about the requirement for judges to be impartial. The Constitution requires it but it also relies on the judges themselves to exercise their impartiality. Some do this well. Others see their appointment to the bench as an opportunity to push agendas that the legislative branch never could because the public would vote them out of office. The ninth has the worst reputation for this so in that sense you out to be quite happy that this lawsuit was filed in AZ rather than in some other jurisdiction.

I consider myself out to be happy then.

 

[CallawayGolf]

I consider myself out to be happy then.

Good catch. I guess I ought to have correctly spelled the word I intended to use.

 

[cleardirect]

I asked in many previous posts;

"What did Judge Tashima ask your attorney about the Ramey case that caused such a pause in the tape?" I do not believe you answered me yet.

Listen to the tape of the hearing. Answer the questions yourself.

Can you guys not do your own research? No wonder you east guys are clueless. No skills.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_sub...k_id=0000004583

 

[veritasaequitas]

Listen to the tape of the hearing. Answer the questions yourself.

Can you guys not do your own research? No wonder you east guys are clueless. No skills.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_sub...k_id=0000004583

Leading question

 

[traderjake]

Sigh..The man's in the top 517 Trader..exactly who's job is he trying to "steal"?

It doesn't surprise me that you can't follow a simple concept.

Like you, the man hides behind DOH to collectively steal the jobs of 1800 West pilots and give them to East pilots.

His personal position on the list doesn't change that fact.