US Pilots Labor Discussion 6/20- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[nic4us]

EDITED BY MODERATOR TO DELETED REMOVED POST

I thought you were going on a self imposed trip to the cornfield.

Typical usapa supporter, can't keep your word, oh well, guess I will have to reply to your post.

I do not want a vote, do not need a vote, do not care who votes how. I do not care if there is joint ratification, seperate ratification, BPR ratification.

All I need is a really incredibly stupid group of disgruntled malcontents to try and use their majority status to renege on their contractual obligations by electing a union that campaigned on the promise of greatly improving their seniority by stealing it from their new found co-workers.

You usapa folks really need to take an honest appraisal of what happened here, what you tried to do, and get familiar with the word acceptance.

 

[end_of_alpa]

I thought you were going on a self imposed trip to the cornfield.

Typical usapa supporter, can't keep your word, oh well, guess I will have to reply to your post.

I do not want a vote, do not need a vote, do not care who votes how. I do not care if there is joint ratification, seperate ratification, BPR ratification.

All I need is a really incredibly stupid group of disgruntled malcontents to try and use their majority status to renege on their contractual obligations by electing a union that campaigned on the promise of greatly improving their seniority by stealing it from their new found co-workers.

You usapa folks really need to take an honest appraisal of what happened here, what you tried to do, and get familiar with the word acceptance.

I was, but then I realized just how much fun I have jerking YOUR chain!!! What a HOOT!

Then I realized that statements just like yours are the reason YOU are in the position YOU are in.

Why, just last night I listened to the latest Dougie crew news in PHX. You just CANNOT get what Doug just keeps telling YOU GUYS: absent the COST factorm they are leaving seniority up to...(drum roll please) THE PILOTS!!!

I can tell YOUR guys still can't grasp that, for example, this "arbitration" as ALPA calls it, is NOT NOR NEVER HAS BEEN, Federal. That guy calls Nicolau "judge' nicolau. Here we go again. HE HAS NOT NOR EVER WILL BE A JUDGE!

Funny about that "honest appraisal", I was about to tell YOU about the MEANING of the word "acceptance". In fact, why don't YOU go listen to the PHX crew news and give us YOUR opinion???

 

[end_of_alpa]

USAPA presented it's list to the company about a year ago - why hasn't Parker accepted it if he really has to? He certainly had plenty of opportunity before the injunction was issued. If the company lawyers have told him he "has to" accept it as long as it meets the criteria, he's protected from being tangled up in the legal battle.



The 7th Court of Appeals, is the closest case to the current situation that I've found, said this about ALPA merger policy:

"The system that ALPA has created for determining seniority in a merged work force is not biased in favor of one group of workers or prejudiced against another. It was as likely to yield an award in favor of Air Wisconsin's pilots as in favor of Mississippi Valley's. It is fair, and nothing more is required to comply with the duty of fair representation, since "so long as the union does not intentionally harm a member or class of members, it will be deemed to have represented its members fairly." Olsen v. United Parcel Service, 892 F.2d 1290, 1294 (7th Cir.1990). That the system ALPA has created places a good deal of power in the hand of arbitrators is not a sign of "unfairness" in the limited sense relevant to evaluating claims of breach of the duty of fair representation, especially since the alternative would be to encourage continuing and acrimonious disputes among workers by opening seniority to continual revision. It is not in the interest of organized labor to incite workers to fight among themselves over job rights. Nor is it in the workers' own interest, behind the veil of ignorance, that is, before they know whether they have been the winner or loser of the arbitration. Here as elsewhere finality serves important social purposes and we certainly cannot pronounce ALPA unfair for giving the arbitrators' determination of seniority as much finality as it has done."

The DFR suit was filed by a group of pilots from the side that thought that the arbitrator's decision was unfair, after first attempting but failing to de-certify ALPA. The District Court ruled against them so they appealed to the 7th, which upheld the District Court's ruling.

As I have said before, ALPA's merger policy has been tested in court and found not only reasonable but written the way it is for valid reasons.. Those who say ALPA should have "a solid, fair merger policy" really only want a policy that specifies the outcome they they desire - a policy that specifies that all mergers will use relative position species an outcome but is dismissed as unfair. In their "it's all about me" narrow-minded view, anything that doesn't give them what they want is deemed "unfair". Unfortunately for them, they're swimming upstream against the strong current of legal precedence.

Jim

He hasn't "accepted" it because as of right now, he doesn't have to UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE. That's why.

Secondly, I have briefed this case over TWO YEARS ago when we formed USAPA. I even posted it here, back when I "thought" the issues could be addressed and not the poster. My "naivety" has since wore off.

Not that YOU care, but why don't YOU go back and read my old posts and quote from them. I won't repeat that history.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

He hasn't "accepted" it because as of right now, he doesn't have to UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE. That's why.

Secondly, I have briefed this case over TWO YEARS ago when we formed USAPA. I even posted it here, back when I "thought" the issues could be addressed and not the poster. My "naivety" has since wore off.

Not that YOU care, but why don't YOU go back and read my old posts and quote from them. I won't repeat that history.

Actually, he can't because judge wake has not lifted the injunction requiring USAPA to negotiate for the NIc, nor has he dismissed the case yet. I don't know just what the timeframe is, but it WILL happen. Then, the new list can be submitted and accepted.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Not true.

If we have to furlough 1000 pilots with your DOH seniority list all of them would be West pilots.

That is a windfall for the bottom East pilot who was first in line to be furloughed before the merger.

So, what's not fair about furloughing guys that have only been on the property 4 or 5 years before guys that have been on the property 20-25 years? Especially considering that MOST of the cuts appear to be on the old west system.

You know, you could offer to take an EVLA to save one of them, if you're so concerned and moire furloughs happen.

Sounds like some recalls may be right around the corner. Let's hope so.

 

[nic4us]

I was, but then I realized just how much fun I have jerking YOUR chain!!! What a HOOT!

It is fun for me too, and that ain't my chain!!!!!

 

[nic4us]

Actually, he can't because judge wake has not lifted the injunction requiring USAPA to negotiate for the NIc, nor has he dismissed the case yet. I don't know just what the timeframe is, but it WILL happen. Then, the new list can be submitted and accepted.

Oldie,

This one you got right. usapa is still under the injunction until the case is dismissed.

The timeframe for Parker, or the next CEO for that matter, to accept a list other than the Nic, is as Parker said in the crew news, some time that we are very, very far away from. The matter is still subject to litigation, and that will continue for some time.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Oldie,

This one you got right. usapa is still under the injunction until the case is dismissed.

The timeframe for Parker, or the next CEO for that matter, to accept a list other than the Nic, is as Parker said in the crew news, some time that we are very, very far away from. The matter is still subject to litigation, and that will continue for some time.

I'd bet we have a new contract by the end of the year. No NIC.

 

[Metroyet]

I'd bet we have a new contract by the end of the year. No NIC.

I sincerely hope you do. I enjoyed the littigation the first time. Knowing the outcome minus the ripeness issue will make it that much more enjoyable.

 

[767jetz]

I don't know just what the timeframe is, but it WILL happen.

Or not. Your crystal ball is no more accurate than that of anyone else.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Oldie,

This one you got right. usapa is still under the injunction until the case is dismissed.

The timeframe for Parker, or the next CEO for that matter, to accept a list other than the Nic, is as Parker said in the crew news, some time that we are very, very far away from. The matter is still subject to litigation, and that will continue for some time.

Injunction was lifted june 4th it is waiting the EN BANC WAKE signed it over! MM!

 

[767jetz]

I'd bet we have a new contract by the end of the year. No NIC.

I'd bet that even if you do, that contract will be blocked from taking effect by injunction or other legal means until all legal challenges are exhausted. Alternately, it might take effect just long enough (a day or so) to make the west's case ripe, and then be blocked as above.

Either way, as you east guys were so fond of saying to the west... you won't be able to cash in your lottery ticket yet.

Just like after all the celebrating after the 9th ruled, now that the hangover has passed and sobriety sets back in, you are still under an injunction preventing anything from happening. Your certainty that the en banc hearing will not be granted is completely premature. Since there was a dissenting opinion and the ruling was not unanimous, there is AT LEAST a 50/50 chance the full court will hear it. Flip a coin oldie. that would be just as accurate as your crystal ball.

 

[767jetz]

Injunction was lifted june 4th it is waiting the EN BANC WAKE signed it over! MM!

I'm not so sure about the accuracy of that statement. But even if it's true, the case is not yet dismissed until we know about the en banc hearing. Either way, same effect. The stalemate continues indefinitely.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

I sincerely hope you do. I enjoyed the littigation the first time. Knowing the outcome minus the ripeness issue will make it that much more enjoyable.

Knowing the outcome! HOW CLASSIC! MM! PHX crew visit was interesting byole DP! Out of WAKES hands in the 9th they can wait for a final mandate technicall 767JETZ is correct depends on completion of EN BANC!

 

[oldiebutgoody]

I'd bet that even if you do, that contract will be blocked from taking effect by injunction or other legal means until all legal challenges are exhausted. Alternately, it might take effect just long enough (a day or so) to make the west's case ripe, and then be blocked as above.

Either way, as you east guys were so fond of saying to the west... you won't be able to cash in your lottery ticket yet.

Just like after all the celebrating after the 9th ruled, now that the hangover has passed and sobriety sets back in, you are still under an injunction preventing anything from happening. Your certainty that the en banc hearing will not be granted is completely premature. Since there was a dissenting opinion and the ruling was not unanimous, there is AT LEAST a 50/50 chance the full court will hear it. Flip a coin oldie. that would be just as accurate as your crystal ball.

Nope. Wrong again on all counts. You really need to inform yourself on how the RLA process works.

EBOs are issued in WAAAY less than 10% of the cases, and ONLY those of "GREAT IMPORTANCE" (words from the FRAP, not mine). If you'd care to research it, It averages about 1 per month, and usually involving things like life sentences and death penalty issues. I've NEVER seen one issued for a ripeness case.

Let me put it this way. I'm not losing sleep over it. You might be. I don't know just what YOUR interest in this is, but it's obviously NOT as a bystander. Are you married to a West Pilot? Thought so.

By the way, the case has NOT been dismissed yet, and the injunction is still in place. The items he dismissed on the 4th were motions still pending before his court dealing with the issues of the case. It's only a matter of time, though. Wake has been ORDERED by the Ninth to dismiss it.