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

[hp_fa]

Reed,

Aqua is correct. The correct venue for deciding facts is with the trial court, which means that the USAPA lawyers should have at least tried there before going to the 9th for emergency relief in a matter already submitted to the 9th for determination. If Judge Wake had denied USAPA then they could at least say to the 9th that we tried first with the trial court and we appeal that decision to you. Also, Judge Wake still does retain jurisdiction of his permanent injunction absent any reversal by the 9th.

Finally I cannot imagine that the bland Motion, without anything more than newspaper conjecture as exhibits, will have any useful purpose. You don't tell a court that you have super-secret information that requires something from the court, yet fail to tell the court what that information is. A far better alternative is to either receive permission to file under seal or request an in camera session with the trial judge and opposing counsel.

 

[veritasaequitas]

Attaching exhibits that weren't included/submitted at the trial court amounts to new evidence. What on Earth are they doing submitting new evidence to an appeals court?

You could get an experts opinion on this by asking your West Attorney, 28j Jacobs.

 

[aquagreen73s]

EDITED TO REMOVE DELETED POST BY MODERATOR



It's evident to anyone with half a brain that the "scope" now includes an esteemed gentleman who wears a black robe and has lifetime tenure in his position. Wanna hear some good conversations, then just wait for what's rolling down the pike. Many on the East have failed to appreciate the power of a federal judge. Just ask Rick Lavoy over at APA about the power a federal judge has when someone violates an order.

 

[veritasaequitas]

It's evident to anyone with half a brain that the "scope" now includes an esteemed gentleman who wears a black robe and has lifetime tenure in his position.

As apposed to pilots tenure.

 

[veritasaequitas]

Interesting question. Why do Judges, professors and other professions get lifetime tenures? They all get together and agree on this.

The reason the pilot profession has been and will be in peril is due to the absence of tenure, period.

ALPA and United Airlines pilots are against tenure ..........,,,,,,,,,,,,. Er, excuse me, they are for it now, but were against it earlier right after they were for it, before they were against it before, after they were for it then.

I get it, I think.

 

[Metroyet]

I have to wonder, Now that UAL has furloughees with hire dates in the late 90's, will USAPA still take the position that the furloughed UAL pilot should be granted a higher seniority on a combined list than the current LCC furloughees. I mean it's only logical right? What are the hire dates of the former AAA furloughees 2006 or so? Considering such a large disparity in the DOH of the given furloughees, I expect USAPA to argue that UAL's furloughees get placed much higher up than their own. To advocate otherwise would be hypocritical and we all know how honest and above board USAPA is.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Interesting question. Why do Judges, professors and other professions get lifetime tenures? They all get together and agree on this.I get it, I think.

Well, if you are content to make up facts to support your argument then you're doing great!

Judges didn't just "get together and agree on it." Not in the least. In the case of federal judges their lifetime tenure was created by the Founding Fathers themselves. See Article III of the U.S. Constitution. The idea was a good one: to form an independent judiciary that is free from influences that might affect the objective pursuit of justice. Bankruptcy judges are not Article III judges by the way; they are appointed to 14 year terms. Neither do administrative judges (Immigration, NTSB, etc.) enjoy liftetime tenure. Same goes for U.S. Magistrates. They could all put several years into the job and then poof! They're gone. It happens, too.

Professors have tenure as a measure to protect academic freedom, or so the argument goes. It's not the product of some academic types "getting together and agreeing" to give themselves tenure.

Other than those two professions, I bet you would be hard pressed to name any other professions who have lifetime tenure, other than perhaps inmates serving life sentences at the local department of corrections facility. And even those poor saps didn't just "get together and decide to give themselves tenure!"

 

[BoeingBoy]

Fences Jim. They were needed in this merge to protect the big disparity. You know it!

Ah, yes - those fences the East offered in negotiations, mediation, arbitration. What were they again...refresh my memory.

Just for the sake of argument, suppose there was someone separate from USAPA authorized to negotiate fences with the East. Just who would interpret the meaning of those fences when it was time to implement them. USAPA, looking out for the East pilots, perhaps?

I do love how the use of fences gets thrown around now that it's too late to negotiate them. The "My motives are as pure as the driven snow" defense when talk of fences is way too late to do anyone any good.

Jim

 

[veritasaequitas]

The idea was a good one: to form an independent judiciary that is free from influences that might affect the objective pursuit of justice.

Are you listening ALPA?

 

[veritasaequitas]

I have to wonder, Now that UAL has furloughees with hire dates in the late 90's, will USAPA still take the position that the furloughed UAL pilot should be granted a higher seniority on a combined list than the current LCC furloughees. I mean it's only logical right? What are the hire dates of the former AAA furloughees 2006 or so? Considering such a large disparity in the DOH of the given furloughees, I expect USAPA to argue that UAL's furloughees get placed much higher up than their own. To advocate otherwise would be hypocritical and we all know how honest and above board USAPA is.

Good question sir. In your opinion, how should the Furloughed pilots from United be handled, in the unlikely event of a USAirways, United merger?

Direct question to you, not other posters. Your thoughts please sir.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Are you listening ALPA?

Just because you think ALPA was biased and affected the outcome doesn't mean they were or did. But that's been a pretty consistent trait - the East propensity to believe their opinion is the only one that matters.

Jim

 

[veritasaequitas]

Just because you think ALPA was biased and affected the outcome doesn't mean they were or did.
Jim

We have an expert on board now. Sir, how do you think the United Furloghees should be treated in the unlikely event of a USAirways, United merger? Inquiring United pilots would like to know.

Please keep in mind, if I disagree with your opinion, I will immediately click on the negative reputation button, on the bottom right of the screen.

Please do not waste bandwidth.

 

[BoeingBoy]

We have an expert on board now. Sir, how do you think the United Furloghees should be treated in the unlikely event of a USAirways, United merger? Inquiring United pilots would like to know.

As the two pilot groups agree to treat them. Lacking that - oh, say one side refuses to budge from their opinion - as the arbitrator decides to treat them. That, by definition, is fair.

So to ask back - how do you think they should be treated. My pointer is hovering over that "negative reputation button" BTW...

Jim

 

[Metroyet]

Good question sir. In your opinion, how should the Furloughed pilots from United be handled, in the unlikely event of a USAirways, United merger?

Direct question to you, not other posters. Your thoughts please sir.

Wow. I feel so special. Here is my God's honest answer to your question.

I think the United pilots should negotiate in good faith with USAPA and attempt to get the best possible outcome for their pilots. If a mutually agreeable settlement can't be reached then a good 3rd party mediator might be able to help the two sides move closer. Failing that, the last step should be what's known as "Final and Binding" arbitration. When the arbitrator issues his ruling, both sides take deep breaths and move on. So Whatever happens to United's furloughees should be as a result of a good faith process. That's how it's supposed to work and that's how I think the Furloughees should be handled.

Certainly you'll feel that I've dodged your question but frankly, I have no idea what the myriad circumstantial details are around this particular SLI would be so I really can't say what the fair thing is other than to let the agreed upon process work. Here's what I know with certainty. A hire date is just a tiny component of what a professional arbitrator looks at to determine "fairness". To rely solely on a hire date is myopic, clumsy, and filled with error.


Just curious. What would you like to see USAPA do to the United furloughees?

 

[veritasaequitas]

As the two pilot groups agree to treat them. Lacking that - oh, say one side refuses to budge from their opinion - as the arbitrator decides to treat them. That, by definition, is fair.

So to ask back - how do you think they should be treated. My pointer is hovering over that "negative reputation button" BTW...

Jim

Lets put it this way, I would not like them treated like the Empire pilots or the treatment that you think is deserved of the USAirways pilots in the same situation.

The principle remains the same in my beliefs, not swayed by politics or personal results. I would like the United pilots treated, like the MAJORITY of other pilots were treated in mergers in the past, with the original USAirways pilots.