US Pilots Labor Discussion 4/6- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[HPDriver]

A new three-way Transition Agreement.

The fact is there will be no merger activity without that occurring. No time to consummate the original T/A, no matter what the ruling in the 9th.


RR

Hey genius, who is the third part?

USAPA is it for both the east and the west. I'm paying dues to USAPA and only they represent me.

And there's a very strong precedent out there regarding the majority pilots trying to screw over the minority.

 

[HPDriver]

Thank you HP Driver, Calloway, Nic4US, Cactusboy53, Freebird, Onebadcat, and all too numerous to mention. Thank you from ALL of us on the East side. Thank you for the maintenance of LOA 93 wages, and the NIC. You have singlehandedly staved off the chance of the UAL merger. Had it not been for you hanging it all out there for so long, Doug might have actually been able to pull this one off. Not now. And that is a really good thing. Looking forward to the 9th, and the LOA 93 grievance. With a little luck, you are going to really going to see that yes, we did go through some really bad times, but we had some really decent provisions lurking in that LOA that are going to shine!

Um, ya. Who signed your end of the TA again? Please spare your pathetic attempt to project the ignorance of your leadership on anyone other then your own east pilots.

And this merger is going to happen. Parker is going to put together a contract that will have you east guys falling over yourselves to sign. And he'll do it with some much as a peep from USAPA.

And keep dreaming about your CoC provision - it wasn't triggered in this merger and it won't be triggered with the next one.

But then you already know that SC, don't you.

 

[cleardirect]

Jim, how does any ruling from the Ninth "settle" the seniority integration?

Seniority will only be settled one way, with a vote by the member pilots. That vote can occur at any time, even now.

But it has not.

RR

Seniority is settled. The other thing that any of us ever had is a vote on a joint contract. The seniority will be the Nicolau contained in that contract.

No one gets a vote on seniority, never has it never will.

There is a difference between voting on seniority and voting on a contract.

 

[cleardirect]

The Cactus 18 RICO Suite was a big loss for USAPA. Dues and Fees from both East and West pilots had to be expended in order to stop some reprehensible behavior. The behavior stopped, but the bills did not. What a terrible loss for us all.

At least that whole affair is over, you know "dismissed with prejudice." It is my understanding the entire thing is settled and done. Thank goodness for that.

USAPA pilots will never recover those lost funds, but at least the Cactus 18 are now off the hook. so to speak. Life is good.

RR

Incorrect!

Yes the RICO case was dismissed with prejudice but usapa appealed it. They spent another big bunch of money appealing the case.

It went to oral arguments. Now waiting for a ruling.

The outcome is this.

If the court upholds the judge. The case is dismissed before it ever goes to trial. Usapa could appeal to the supreme court. More money for Seham. Expect a counter suit from the defendants. More money from the union for damages.

If the court agrees with Seham that only allows usapa to continue to the trial that never happened. More money for Seham. Usapa then still has to prove the Rico charges. That will never happen.


Either way usapa is in a bad way. Seham is going to collect more money and the union is on the hook for another big legal bill. Should have dropped it when you had the chance.

No, this is a long way from over.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim, how does any ruling from the Ninth "settle" the seniority integration?

The list is settled, pending whatever the 9th rules.

Merger, no merger - all it takes is a ratified agreement to put that list into effect. But going into effect is just a step in the process, not a game changer.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Who would have the authority to sign for the west?

USAPA. What I meant by a 3-way transition agreement, assuming a combined contract wasn't reached prior to a merger, is covering who flies what equipment, furlough priority, recall priority, etc given effectively 3 pilot groups in those areas.

Jim

 

[Reed Richards]

Incorrect!

If the court agrees with Seham that only allows usapa to continue to the trial that never happened. More money for Seham. Usapa then still has to prove the Rico charges. That will never happen.


Either way usapa is in a bad way. Seham is going to collect more money and the union is on the hook for another big legal bill. Should have dropped it when you had the chance.

No, this is a long way from over.

I knew exactly what I was saying, and the responses here are classic.

Remember going forward, superheroes cannot use little smiley faces on their posts. Looks bad for the profession.

Looks like the Cactus 18 has USAPA right where they want them. (See sentence above)

RR

 

[Reed Richards]

No one gets a vote on seniority, never has it never will.

There is a difference between voting on seniority and voting on a contract.

So. When I cast my vote on a contract I am not voting for pay rates? Or duty rigs? Or retirement contribution percentages?

Or seniority?

RR

 

[cleardirect]

So. When I cast my vote on a contract I am not voting for pay rates? Or duty rigs? Or retirement contribution percentages?

Or seniority?

RR

No. You vote on a total package. You do not get a vote on every section. No you do not get to vote yes on pay rates and no on seniority.

Every T/A going forward will have the Nicolau as the seniority.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

I knew exactly what I was saying, and the responses here are classic.

Remember going forward, superheroes cannot use little smiley faces on their posts. Looks bad for the profession.

Looks like the Cactus 18 has USAPA right where they want them. (See sentence above)

RR

The RICO suit never was about alleged bad behaviour, it was about stopping the west's ability to bring about a DFR suit. That's why the 18 were added, they were to be the frightened patsies who signed off on a false, coerced confession of RICO activity.

In that sense, all your sarcasm aside, yes usapa failed miserably. The alleged activity usapa was supposedly trying to stop has always been nothing more than a smokescreen.

That RICO case was just pathetic. There was no possibility of any winners in that. And today, simple vindictiveness and face saving on usapa's part keeps it alive in the appeals process.

 

[cynic]

USAPA. What I meant by a 3-way transition agreement, assuming a combined contract wasn't reached prior to a merger, is covering who flies what equipment, furlough priority, recall priority, etc given effectively 3 pilot groups in those areas.

Jim

1. I don't believe that would be legal.
2. It would result in another DFR case in all likelihood.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Assuming USAPA negotiated to fairly protect each pilot group, it would just be a continuation of the East/West restrictions already in effect plus adding in airline XYZ's pilots and giving them similar protections/restrictions during the transition period. Throw in some clairifying language about the order of furloughs/recalls, (including XYZ's pilots) and you have the basic current transition agreement without the East/West seniority language but adding in seniority integration with XYZ's pilots.

There's been no DFR over the current transition agreement other than seniority integration so I see no reason there would be one just because a new transition agreement including XYZ's pilots along the lines I outlined were negotiated.

Jim

 

[Freebird]

Thank you HP Driver, Calloway, Nic4US, Cactusboy53, Freebird, Onebadcat, and all too numerous to mention. Thank you from ALL of us on the East side. Thank you for the maintenance of LOA 93 wages, and the NIC. You have singlehandedly staved off the chance of the UAL merger. Had it not been for you hanging it all out there for so long, Doug might have actually been able to pull this one off. Not now. And that is a really good thing. Looking forward to the 9th, and the LOA 93 grievance. With a little luck, you are going to really going to see that yes, we did go through some really bad times, but we had some really decent provisions lurking in that LOA that are going to shine!

Thanks for the Honorable Mention. However, Im not responsible for your groups inability to live up to your agreements. Nice try.

 

[veritasaequitas]

No. You vote on a total package. You do not get a vote on every section. No you do not get to vote yes on pay rates and no on seniority.

Every T/A going forward will have the Nicolau as the seniority.

This has yet to be decided.

Rare DFR Win For Plaintiffs

 

[HP2USFA]

I give you props for moving away from Wikipedia for your information.

He has an interesting point, but he's not on the 9th. Neither are the B&W folks. And both their blogs are almost a year old.

No one's put out anything more recent?