By AWE, you mean all of USAir? Uh, no. I know it was a confusing comparison but it wasn't meant as "literal". I think the point was "could something unethical be rammed through because the majority wants it to be". If there is anything else we can interpret for you, just let us know.
Yea, you can interpret the meaning of the word acceptance ( as in DOH acceptance ). DP says you will become very familiar with it at some point but it wont be anytime soon.
I suppose I interpret acceptance when it's used in such a phrase as, "You may not like it but that's just the way it is so you'd better accept it". Let's use it along with the term "Binding arbitration", a concept many
refuse to accept while insisting that it's not unreasonable that DOH
can be forced on others. I don't know where you came across a reference to DP (I'm assuming you are referring to our CEO) but he hasn't made any remarks about the seniority list lately. He's eagerly anticipating a substandard contract that will passed in an effort to get DOH. Let's be painfully honest, he wouldn't care if we organized the list from tallest to shortest, he just wants to get the lowest paying contract from the pilots that he can attain.
Yes, it was fair, but I don't understand the comparison that you are trying to draw. Unless perhaps it was the idea of:
Running on the concept of "Change" but not really saying what that meant.
Calling any critics "racist" or in the case of USAPA, "ALPA LOVERS".
Running on a platform of "openness" and then hiding the inner workings of what is going on.
Not carrying through on promises made during the campaign and blaming the previous administration.
Basically, becoming everything you railed against.
Again, maybe you can clarify what you meant.
Simple, that the majority rules - nothing more, nothing less. Do you really think that a contract with NIC will be voted in? Maybe you should have read Clear's posting again that I responded to.
Do I think the East would support a contract if they had the
choice? Honestly, no. But I'm still mystified by the fact East pilots have allowed USAPA to convince them that binding arbitration doesn't apply and the East actually
has a choice. If you got divorced and, in the course of binding arbitration, lost the house and custody of your kids, do you think getting a new lawyer means you get a do over? It simply doesn't work that way. Changing bargaining agents is much the same.
Another thing. The East has to get over the idea that the Wake trial had ANYTHING to do with the NIC. Wake didn't care how the list came together because his job was not to decide what integration philosophy should be considered. The trial was about DFR. More specifically, was USAPA primarily created as a means to bypass the agreed upon seniority list and, as such, did USAPA unfairly represent the West pilots. The jury agreed with the West pilots. The 9th Circuit disagreed with the
timing of the
DFR, not the implementation of the NIC. The SCOTUS may or may not agree. If they agree with the 9th, then a repeat DFR lawsuit is inevitable the moment USAPA slides a DOH list across the table.
The East may have had their frustrations with ALPA, but USAPA was created to remove any power from the West. Had USAPA been created with the intention providing a better level of representative service to the
entire pilot group, and then once chosen as the bargaining agent, DOH been introduced, it would have been a slam dunk for the East.(*!) However, it wasn't that way and we're where we are today as a result of it. In one hell of a legal mess.
(*!) Clarification: Throwing out the
DFR under the principle of "majority rules" would possibly have been achievable. The Nic is the list.
