US Pilots Labor Discussion 6/10- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[88 B.T.D.]

I will say it real simple like.

There will not be a comparison of the lists. It will be a question of why is there a second list, and why are we even discussing this after and arbitration has taken place.

For the company it will be a question of, why did you breach your contract with the West pilots?

Here's the solution. It protects the company so they have incentive, it protects the west so they have incentive. As the CB Agent USAPA and Company can amend the TA (and even have members vote) since the parties who originally signed it have changed. Amended TA says something like : Initial Combined Seniority determined by dual ratified vote of all members in good standing East separately and PHX separately.

 

[nic4us]

The EAST is happy to keep the flying they brought into the merger.
Later,
Eye

Did you mean to say happy to keep flying they brought to the merger plus, the post merger growth, the post merger new aircraft, the post merger new routes, and if it was not for those pesky West pilots all the flying the company does post merger, which those West pilots (who do not deserve the seniority they have) could not hold because our furloughs should be senior to them? I mean after all, that is pretty much what the east group has said in the past, and what usapa still insist is the case todey.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

ALPA obviously thought they were free enough to abandon it. That's what they tried at Wye River. It's hard to tell if the East MEC would have gone along with the great Wye River compromise, but the East's 3 delegates there were ready to accept ALPA's proposal. The West wouldn't have anything to do with it. Those tough guys said no. Now they're going to pay for it for the rest of their careers. The Wye River Compromise (followed by the ALPA/Kirby cramdown) would have gone more LOS than DOH or NIC. With LOS, not a single West pilot would be on furlough now. But they turned it down, even after their own merger attorney Freund told them they better get something on the River or risk getting screwed. But those West "Men Of Genius" said no. Freund was either asked to leave or left in frustration after only 2 days at the conference.

Now ALPA's long gone. They thought Wye River would keep them from being voted off the island and get a new contract. They failed at both. Those are facts. No union politics here.

Now some opinion mixed in fact. According to the West point of view (Westies, please correct me if I'm overstating), anything less than the NIC is DFR material. Any modification, no matter how slight, amounted to an abandonment of the entire award and slam-dunk DFR. ALPA didn't see it that way. USAPA doesn't either. They both viewed the NIC (paraphrasing West's own merger attorney) as merely a negotiating tool/proposal. That's what Freund said in his reply to East MEC's lawsuit against the West. You obviously haven't seen those quotes from what Freund told the court. Obviously the D.C. district Court agreed with Freund. They threw out the suit. But for Freund, those words came back to haunt him. Well, they would have come back to haunt him if the Desert Judge had allowed USAPA to present their entire case. Maybe in the next trial, if there ever is another one.

West loves to say East welched on the deal, East has no integrity, etc. Problem is, ALPA is gone. USAPA wasn't around when all this went down. So it's all angry rhetoric. USAPA has no legal or moral obligation to give the NIC the time of day. The Ninth disagreed. West can continue to throw all the nasty words, phrases at us they want. With the Ninth's ruling, we don't much care. If we get too far out of line with our final contract (like staple), then I'm sure we will have a potential DFR loss ahead of us. But just dumping the NIC, at least in the eyes of the Ninth, does not meet DFR threshold.

Jetz, I really don't get your interest in any of this, other than you are either an ALPA plant or you really don't get it or you just like attracting attention. We already have enough of our own Easties doing all three, anything to disrupt and get back on ALPA FPL. We've outlined, quoted what the Ninth wrote, ad nauseum. Is what the Ninth said so hard to understand?

A little refresher NIC4, especially the FREUND part but he like ALPA are gone, not part of the process! MM!

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Here's the solution. It protects the company so they have incentive, it protects the west so they have incentive. As the CB Agent USAPA and Company can amend the TA (and even have members vote) since the parties who originally signed it have changed. Amended TA says something like : Initial Combined Seniority determined by dual ratified vote of all members in good standing East separately and PHX separately.

So there would be another stalemate? No thanks. How about the West guys helping the East guys come up with a DOH contract with C&R to protect everyone instead.

The dual ratification thing wouldn't work for ALPA, and would NEVER work for USAPA, given the number of negative folks out west. The only way for this to work is to come up with a fair and equitable contract FOR ALL USAPA pilots.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Did you mean to say happy to keep flying they brought to the merger plus, the post merger growth, the post merger new aircraft, the post merger new routes, and if it was not for those pesky West pilots all the flying the company does post merger, which those West pilots (who do not deserve the seniority they have) could not hold because our furloughs should be senior to them? I mean after all, that is pretty much what the east group has said in the past, and what usapa still insist is the case todey.

The airline is SMALLER now than it was then, so yes to all. Oh, and give us the east routes back you guys are now flying.

 

[nic4us]

Here's the solution. It protects the company so they have incentive, it protects the west so they have incentive. As the CB Agent USAPA and Company can amend the TA (and even have members vote) since the parties who originally signed it have changed. Amended TA says something like : Initial Combined Seniority determined by dual ratified vote of all members in good standing East separately and PHX separately.

Ah, therein lies the 360 million dollar question. Do "the AIRLINE PILOTS in the service of AMERICA WEST" still have tripartite contract seperation from usapa? i.e. are the West pilots still a legally seperate class with rights guaranteed by the TA. We certainly had class status in the Addington trial. I would argue, yes we are, and that since we no longer have a seperate means to ratify change to the agreement, you all are stuck with it in its current and original form. That being above all else, seniority integration via ALPA merger policy.

 

[ROACLT]

I will say it real simple like.

There will not be a comparison of the lists. It will be a question of why is there a second list, and why are we even discussing this after and arbitration has taken place.

For the company it will be a question of, why did you breach your contract with the West pilots?

Your claim of breach of contract was dismissed, and discussion that only revolved around Nicalou was a product of Wake's court. USAPA, now that the 9th Circuit has clarified the issue, defense if needed will be why the ratified contract did or did not breach the "good faith standard. Evidence will be broad and based around the fact the previous agent was unable to arrive at an acceptable "seniority proposal", the interests of all its members East and West, finding a solution that the majority will accept, the merits of the proposal and its basis in a widely accepted labor standard(which there is a an incredibly vast amount), it's C & R's to mitigate merger impact over the short term, proper explanation and understanding of union's "good faith" requirement pursuant to DFR and so on and so forth. And yes, the 9th Circuit and their ruling will allow USAPA to present the case that should have been allowed, that Wake's improper rulings didn't allow. Keeping in mind that your petition to the court over a longevity integration may or may not warrant judicial intervention, given the legal obligations that the 9th Circuit just issued with this published opinion.

If, and that is if it makes it to trial, the standards for a future claim just became unquestionably higher with this ruling and the standards for a union, in this case USAPA and its broad range in establishing and defending its legal obligations were maintained and re-emphasized with a published appellate opinion.

As pointed the company made agreement with the legal representative of the West pilot group at that time, ALPA. It is now USAPA, as evidenced by the change already made to your contract since they have become all US Airways pilots legally authorized bargaining agent.

It should be clear that Wake nor your attorney's understand Labor law as the obviously convinced you they did. It should also interesting that the two Democratic judges have intepreted labor law to protect organized labors rights, while the two George Bush appointed judges, would love for courts to insert themselves in union affairs, which would have negative influence on their effectiveness. I am sure behind closed doors, ALPA is pleased with this opinion and by its nature, that courts will stat out of the business of unions and less its behavior toward its members is "wholly irrational."

I perfectly understand the committed effort to put a good spin on this to try and maintain support. I can imagine its not very gratifying to imagine you have been led down the primrose path by the Addington leaders and attorney's and realize it was a 2 year, 2 million dollar waste. It would be really hard to maintain support for any future endeavor, especially with a far weaker hand going forward, and when the entire situation resolved around the incompetence of a former weak union, that outsourced the most basic of labor principles> When it become apparent that West Captains will be safe in their positions, West first ofiicers will have first dibs on those positions, and senior members will have instant access to East premium flying based on their DOH, which would allow your top few hundred to be competitive for any East position by the time you have an integrated bid.

 

[nic4us]

A little refresher NIC4, especially the FREUND part but he like ALPA are gone, not part of the process! MM!

Where has Freund gone? Did he pass away and I was unaware? MUTATIS, know who AWAPPA is?

 

[nic4us]

The airline is SMALLER now than it was then, so yes to all. Oh, and give us the east routes back you guys are now flying.

Disproportianately smaller on the West of course.

 

[ROACLT]

Man, just about everything you east posters put on here needs correction.

It did not cost us 2 million dollars, it cost us over 4 million dollars. 1.8 million for Polsinelli-Shughart and 2.5 million for Seeham.

Here is another little gem for the "should have listened to Freund" crowd. Freund told both Bradford (usapa) and Parker(the company), you touch the Nic, we are suing you. I have both letters archived. So I am glad you put so much credence behind his knowledge and advice. Maybe the next suit will come with the West represented by his firm now that Harper and Leonidas have held usapa at the metaphorical Thermopylae. No, on second thought, I think Polsinelli-Shughart scares the hell out of the company, best to stick with them.

You east posters are a laugh at every post; Nicolau was senile. Desert judge Wake was out of his league, does not know the law. Jury was biased. Bybee got it wrong. Our lawyers "didn't understand the law", and you think I need to become enlightened and honest with myself?

Obviously Freund knew the merit of his own letter, where is he now? As the obvious best subject matter expert, why didn't he litigate your case? The 1.2 million spent annually by USAPA, most East pilots, I imagine would consider it well spent. Consider the fact that, ALPA has had as many as 7 DFR suits at any one time, and recently had 3 from US Airways pilots alone, 2 over the retirement issue and the MDA suit. They had 4-5 that had nothing to do with US Airways in any way, yet the East and West pilots for that matter were forced to pay for those legal bills through ALPA dues. I have heard that ALPA keeps 65% of dues at the national level, so in your particular case at US Airways, you guys are enjoying a 5.3 million dollar dues benefit over ALPA. The 6.5 million ALPA no longer keeps for its general use minus the 1.2 million in annual legal expense. Make no mistake, USAPA or any union is going to fact legal challenges. It is America after all.

Wake and Bybee were G.W Bush appointees. They would love to see union rights, and legal authority narrowed and the threat of constant judicial intervention. While you may adore them, I guarantee you if ALPA has any semblance of a union, their lawyers would completely disagree with your assessment of Wake and Bybee.

 

[nic4us]

Your claim of breach of contract was dismissed, and discussion that only revolved around Nicalou was a product of Wake's court. USAPA, now that the 9th Circuit has clarified the issue, defense if needed will be why the ratified contract did or did not breach the "good faith standard. Evidence will be broad and based around the fact the previous agent was unable to arrive at an acceptable "seniority proposal", the interests of all its members East and West, finding a solution that the majority will accept, the merits of the proposal and its basis in a widely accepted labor standard(which there is a an incredibly vast amount), it's C & R's to mitigate merger impact over the short term, proper explanation and understanding of union's "good faith" requirement pursuant to DFR and so on and so forth. And yes, the 9th Circuit and their ruling will allow USAPA to present the case that should have been allowed, that Wake's improper rulings didn't allow. Keeping in mind that your petition to the court over a longevity integration may or may not warrant judicial intervention, given the legal obligations that the 9th Circuit just issued with this published opinion.

If, and that is if it makes it to trial, the standards for a future claim just became unquestionably higher with this ruling and the standards for a union, in this case USAPA and its broad range in establishing and defending its legal obligations were maintained and re-emphasized with a published appellate opinion.

As pointed the company made agreement with the legal representative of the West pilot group at that time, ALPA. It is now USAPA, as evidenced by the change already made to your contract since they have become all US Airways pilots legally authorized bargaining agent.

It should be clear that Wake nor your attorney's understand Labor law as the obviously convinced you they did. It should also interesting that the two Democratic judges have intepreted labor law to protect organized labors rights, while the two George Bush appointed judges, would love for courts to insert themselves in union affairs, which would have negative influence on their effectiveness. I am sure behind closed doors, ALPA is pleased with this opinion and by its nature, that courts will stat out of the business of unions and less its behavior toward its members is "wholly irrational."

I perfectly understand the committed effort to put a good spin on this to try and maintain support. I can imagine its not very gratifying to imagine you have been led down the primrose path by the Addington leaders and attorney's and realize it was a 2 year, 2 million dollar waste. It would be really hard to maintain support for any future endeavor, especially with a far weaker hand going forward, and when the entire situation resolved around the incompetence of a former weak union, that outsourced the most basic of labor principles> When it become apparent that West Captains will be safe in their positions, West first ofiicers will have first dibs on those positions, and senior members will have instant access to East premium flying based on their DOH, which would allow your top few hundred to be competitive for any East position by the time you have an integrated bid.

Did you just write 5 long paragraphs supporting the exact same arguements that got you sued and found liable the first time?

I did catch that part about Wake and our lawyers do not understand the law. Maybe that is why they asked Bob Siegal, when they had access to him in court.

Again, it does not matter how you change the seniority, it only matters why you changed it. Your arguement that a Nic contract could not pass is entirely speculative, and does not merit abandoning an arbitrated decision.

But go ahead and waste another $4-5 million persuing your disciminatory DOH dream, damages from an "unquestionably ripe DFR" will unquestionably be paid.

 

[nic4us]

Obviously Freund knew the merit of his own letter, where is he now? As the obvious best subject matter expert, why didn't he litigate your case? The 1.2 million spent annually by USAPA, most East pilots, I imagine would consider it well spent. Consider the fact that, ALPA has had as many as 7 DFR suits at any one time, and recently had 3 from US Airways pilots alone, 2 over the retirement issue and the MDA suit. They had 4-5 that had nothing to do with US Airways in any way, yet the East and West pilots for that matter were forced to pay for those legal bills through ALPA dues. I have heard that ALPA keeps 65% of dues at the national level, so in your particular case at US Airways, you guys are enjoying a 5.3 million dollar dues benefit over ALPA. The 6.5 million ALPA no longer keeps for its general use minus the 1.2 million in annual legal expense. Make no mistake, USAPA or any union is going to fact legal challenges. It is America after all.

Wake and Bybee were G.W Bush appointees. They would love to see union rights, and legal authority narrowed and the threat of constant judicial intervention. While you may adore them, I guarantee you if ALPA has any semblance of a union, their lawyers would completely disagree with your assessment of Wake and Bybee.

On this one topic of dues value, you make a good arguement. But, that is obvious, all dues stay in house.

The observation that 3 out of 7 current ALPA DFR suits are from AAA speaks volumes.

Freund did not represent AOL because he was not asked to, he was not fired by the West or anything like that. I believe he did do all the initial response work for AWAPPA in regard to the RICO suit.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Where has Freund gone? Did he pass away and I was unaware? MUTATIS, know who AWAPPA is?

ACTUALLY , I WAS SPEAKING OF HIS "NOTICE OF REMOVAL" JULY 27? 2007, I can refresh your memory! MM!

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Disproportianately smaller on the West of course.

The recession hit the west route system harder than the east. Who's fault is that? The East didn't bring the PHX or LAS hubs. The East closed it's western hubs and domiciles YEARS ago because they didn't make money. Can't blame the East side for the West side's problems before the merger. You get what you brought to the table, and WE get what WE brought. That's fair. The east brought huge attrition in a couple more years, and the west brought stagnation without some kind of major growth. That's the way it is.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

NIC, pleez got sued and found liable the first time? TRY never happened "DISMISS" try reading the order, "YOUR CASE HAD NO MERIT!" MM!And was flying UPWIND!