US Pilots Labor Discussion 7/28- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[cleardirect]

Question?

All we heard from the east is that DOH is the “gold standard” that you are protecting good union values. That other unions are so proud of you for standing up to the whatever you lie to yourselves about.

Why would you taint or tarnish that “gold standard” with C&R. All the other unions followed their merger policy, I mean went DOH why would you guys not be good union pilots and just use DOH?

Could it be that not even usapa could not justify stapling 85% of the west below your furloughs? Could it be that even the lunatics in the usapa leadership knew that straight DOH was a for sure DFR?

 

[hp_fa]

Okay, here are a few questions for those that know more about law than I do. The company has filled a lawsuit to (supposedly) come to get an answer to whether they have to use the Nic or not, so one side or another will be told they can't have what they want.

The purpose of the declaratory relief action is for the court to review the situation and inform the company of how it must proceed in order to avoid liability in a future lawsuit. The court will not **directly** address the future rights and responsibilities of the defendants, although in practicality any future ruling could effectively address the future rights and responsibilities of the defendants. (I know that is a fine point I am making, but the declaratory relief action is different in nature than a normal liability and damages proceeding.

Does the losing party have the right to follow the same track as Addington,i.e. appeal to the 9th, then appeal to the SCOTUS?

Technically there isn't a losing party. The company will just receive guidance from the court on how it must proceed to avoid future liability. As to the second part I am not absolutely certain but I ** believe ** that any ruling would be appealable if, for no other reason, that one of the parties may seek review of whether the trial court acted properly in issuing, or not issuing, a declaratory ruling.

I found the following at Answers.com. Although it isn't a source that I would cite in any brief, it should give an idea of the general issue of that you seek knowledge.

Statutory remedy for the determination of a justiciable controversy where the plaintiff is in doubt as to his or her legal rights. A binding adjudication of the rights and status of litigants even though no consequential relief is awarded.

Individuals may seek a declaratory judgment after a legal controversy has arisen but before any damages have occurred or any laws have been violated. A declaratory judgment differs from other judicial rulings in that it does not require that any action be taken. Instead, the judge, after analyzing the controversy, simply issues an opinion declaring the rights of each of the parties involved. A declaratory judgment may only be granted in justiciable controversies — that is, in actual, rather than hypothetical, controversies that fall within a court's jurisdiction.

A declaratory judgment, sometimes called declaratory relief, is conclusive and legally binding as to the present and future rights of the parties involved. The parties involved in a declaratory judgment may not later seek another court resolution of the same legal issue unless they appeal the judgment.

Declaratory judgments are often sought in situations involving contracts, deeds, leases, andwills. An insurance company, for example, might seek a declaratory judgment as to whether a policy applies to a certain person or event. Declaratory judgments also commonly involve individuals or parties who seek to determine their rights under specific regulatory or criminal laws.

Declaratory judgments are considered a type of preventive justice because, by informing parties of their rights, they help them to avoid violating specific laws or the terms of a contract. In 1934 Congress enacted the Declaratory Judgment Act (28 U.S.C.A. § 2201 et seq.), which allows for declaratory judgments concerning issues of federal law. At the state level, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws passed the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (12 U.L.A. 109) in 1922. Between 1922 and 1993, this act was adopted in forty-one states, the Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Most other states have varying laws that provide for declaratory judgments. Most declaratory judgment laws grant judges discretion to decide whether or not to issue a declaratory judgment.

And let's say that the court says the company and USAPA are free to negotiate whatever they want, isn't there still the chance of another DFR against USAPA for not looking after the west's best interests?

Yes.

I hope that helps with your questions.

 

[nic4us]

Question?

Could it be that not even usapa could not justify stapling 85% of the west below your furloughs? Could it be that even the lunatics in the usapa leadership knew that straight DOH was a for sure DFR?

Answere!

Because they thought they might possibly get the support of even a few West pilots, to protect them from the overtly obvious DFR and just as importantly the now coming ALPA drive.

Cards coming soon to a company near you.

 

[luvthe9]

If that is the case than DFR II becomes even easier. usapa still has a duty to represent all pilots fairly. If the east gets a raise (not going to happen) and usapa walks away from the talk leaving the west at our current wages.

DID NOT REPRESENT FAIRLY.


Now how about this. The east wind LOA 93(not going to happen). The company decides to transfer flying to the now cheaper side.
Or
The company decides that parity is now fair because usapa has not been fair and the company has to do what the union refuses to do and protect the pilots from the union.

That would be a good conversation in front of a jury. The company offered the west pilots pay parity but the union denied the west.

I would say that it is a good thing guys like you are not running the union but they are. People that are supposed to be a pilot union leadership are trying everyday to take from the west.

Karma is a hard thing and the more you mess with it the harder it hits back.

Those poor captains that have gone along with the angry FO's are going to retire on LOA 93 wages for nothing. And the AFOC will still have to live with Nicolau.

We are on two different pay scales now. Why do you seem to think you are so special once the tables are possibly turned, you instantly trigger a DFR? It is a different pay scale, separate ops. If we get it, it has nothing to do with you. Period. Oh, I forgot, the sun revolves around the west pilots.......

 

[snapthis]

Answere!

Because they thought they might possibly get the support of even a few West pilots, to protect them from the overtly obvious DFR and just as importantly the now coming ALPA drive.

Cards coming soon to a company near you.

I'll sign a card, any union but the one we currently have is just fine with me.

 

[luvthe9]

The purpose of the declaratory relief action is for the court to review the situation and inform the company of how it must proceed in order to avoid liability in a future lawsuit. The court will not **directly** address the future rights and responsibilities of the defendants, although in practicality any future ruling could effectively address the future rights and responsibilities of the defendants. (I know that is a fine point I am making, but the declaratory relief action is different in nature than a normal liability and damages proceeding.



Technically there isn't a losing party. The company will just receive guidance from the court on how it must proceed to avoid future liability. As to the second part I am not absolutely certain but I ** believe ** that any ruling would be appealable if, for no other reason, that one of the parties may seek review of whether the trial court acted properly in issuing, or not issuing, a declaratory ruling.

I found the following at Answers.com. Although it isn't a source that I would cite in any brief, it should give an idea of the general issue of that you seek knowledge.





Yes.

I hope that helps with your questions.

Thanks HP. As we tried to tell some on this board, although they tried to gin this up into something like a massive lawsuit, it is nothing of the sort. It is nothing more than the company asking for clarification so they can move forward without choosing sides, which is what they want to do.

 

[hp_fa]

Thanks HP. As we tried to tell some on this board, although they tried to gin this up into something like a massive lawsuit, it is nothing of the sort. It is nothing more than the company asking for clarification so they can move forward without choosing sides, which is what they want to do.

Depending on how you define massive it could still become significant in size. For the judge to make the ruling there will still be facts that must be determined so that the judge has all the available information. At this point in time I have no reading on how involved large this might, or might not, become.

 

[Pi brat]

As we should have learned from the past, there are so many variables in the future that we cannot predict the outcome, or the timeline to that end.

I take this request at face value, and have no reason to believe the company has an alterior motive of as stalling as usapa claims. As I just pointed out in a previous post, all the delay is primarily of the east's and usapa's making. For usapa to come out with this update that says in effect, "hey we gave the company the keys to the stallmobile, and now they want to actually drive it", is enough to make me bang my head on the wall. Especially when the company is publicly stating they are driving the stallmobile to the dealer to trade it for a new model, the Buick "Resolution".

I agree. I think all sides publish what fits their cause that day. This thing has a long way to go and we just have to ride it out. Nobody is going to say"Ok, I give!".

 

[Pi brat]

I hope that helps with your questions.

Thanks hp, it does. Just backs up my belief that this thing is a long time from over.

 

[MyJ4JjobSucks]

Are there any rules for companies filing lawsuits against it's labor unions? It would seem to me that a company with deep pockets could eventually bankrupt a union just by filing frivolous lawsuits against said union. Will the company be on the hook at all for any of the attorneys fees?

 

[snapthis]

Are there any rules for companies filing lawsuits against it's labor unions? It would seem to me that a company with deep pockets could eventually bankrupt a union just by filing frivolous lawsuits against said union. Will the company be on the hook at all for any of the attorneys fees?

Here is part of an article you may be interested in reading:

Judge levies $45.5 million fine against American Airlines pilots' union
By Jerry White
17 April 1999
In one of the largest fines ever levied against an American trade union, US District Judge Elton "Joe" Kendall Thursday ordered the Allied Pilots Association (APA) to pay $45.5 million in damages to American Airlines for last February's sick-out by AA pilots. The massive fine--$7 million more than the APA's net worth of $38 million--is designed to effectively destroy the union representing 9,200 pilots at American Airlines.

The judge's action stems from a 10-day job action by thousands of American pilots against contract violations and the outsourcing of jobs to American's low-cost affiliate Reno Air. The sick-out, which began on February 6, quickly got out of the control of the APA leadership and crippled the country's second-largest airline, forcing American to cancel 6,000 flights and disrupt travel for 600,000 passengers. In the course of the job action, rank-and-file pilots defied Kendall's February 10 back-to-work order. Three days afterwards the judge held the union in contempt of court and ordered APA officials to pay $10 million as a down payment on a future "eight-figure" fine.

On Thursday Kendall rejected arguments from union attorneys that cancellations following his back-to-work order had only cost the airline between $1.4 million and $4.7 million. Dispensing with even the appearance of neutrality, the Texas judge backed American's claim that it had lost $50 million, saying, "American Airlines is not going to want to go to the public and the stockholders and talk about taking that kind of hit without it being true." Kendall said the $45.5 million damage award was "a conservative" estimate of the harm done to American.

 

[cleardirect]

Are there any rules for companies filing lawsuits against it's labor unions? It would seem to me that a company with deep pockets could eventually bankrupt a union just by filing frivolous lawsuits against said union. Will the company be on the hook at all for any of the attorneys fees?

Is usapa on the hook for a frivolous RICO suit?

Who says that this is frivolous? the company is asking the court if they have to abide by the T/A and binding arbitration.

A weak union could BK itself by filing frivolous grievances. LOA 93, any guess what that cost?

 

[luvthe9]

Who is your perceived audience here?

You REALLY need to take this stuff less personally. Especially on a public web forum.

This has nothing to do with who is smarter than whom. The company has attorneys advising them, and they believe they have a right to file this suit. So be it. It will run it's course. regardless of your OPINION or mine or anyone else.

As for "telling you something the 9th did not," I think you are the one guilty of that. The 9th said "not ripe." That's all. If it becomes ripe then they have every right to bring DFR #2 to court. I am not predicting the outcome of any of this except that IMO the odds favor the west. It can still go either way. You, my friend are the one claiming to know the outcome beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Although your reaction to any countering point of view implies that you really are afraid that the outcome may not be what you want. If you are truly sure that "their argument will fail" why all the drama? Wouldn't it be less stressful to state your opinions, allow others to have theirs, and wait and see how it unfolds? Maybe you have a more accurate crystal ball than anyone else here. But if not, the lawyers are being paid to do what they do. And the rest of us will still be here talking about it.

What I'd really like to know from you is this: IF this doesn't unfold the way you wish/predict/whatever, and IF the court tells the company they have no legal choice but to keep the list they already accepted, and IF USAPA then puts out a contract that includes the Nic in some form, will you be honorable enough to come back here and admit that you were wrong? Even though I never claimed to know the definite outcome of anything, I was one of the first on this thread to admit that the 9th ruling did not turn out as I had thought it might. How about you?

Does your wife/husband work here as a pilot or F/A?

 

[cleardirect]

We are on two different pay scales now. Why do you seem to think you are so special once the tables are possibly turned, you instantly trigger a DFR? It is a different pay scale, separate ops. If we get it, it has nothing to do with you. Period. Oh, I forgot, the sun revolves around the west pilots.......

Yes we are on separate contract now. The contracts that we had. It is usapa duty to get improvements for ALL US Airways pilots since they are the CBA. So far 2 years later not much progress.

But what did you say earlier?

If Casher delivers the way we hope he does, the East gets an instant contract. After that, if that happens, we could care less about a contract. It is that easy.

So that means that IF the EAST gets an improvement to your contract and what you said was usapa could care less about getting the west any further improvements. So yes it would be a DFR because usapa the CBA would be treating a domicile differently and less fair. It would still be usapa duty to continue to negotiate a contract. If they walked away from their duties, DFR. A 4-5-6 year delay would not be considered good faith.

Maybe you guys are beginning to understand this whole union thing is kind of tricky and most of you are not sophisticated enough to deal with it.

 

[luvthe9]

Yes we are on separate contract now. The contracts that we had. It is usapa duty to get improvements for ALL US Airways pilots since they are the CBA. So far 2 years later not much progress.

But what did you say earlier?


So that means that IF the EAST gets an improvement to your contract and what you said was usapa could care less about getting the west any further improvements. So yes it would be a DFR because usapa the CBA would be treating a domicile differently and less fair. It would still be usapa duty to continue to negotiate a contract. If they walked away from their duties, DFR. A 4-5-6 year delay would not be considered good faith.

Maybe you guys are beginning to understand this whole union thing is kind of tricky and most of you are not sophisticated enough to deal with it.

But you were not obligated or felt the need to get pay parity for the east, right. Yes, it is tricky business. And if the east gets the LOA 84 pay, we will undertake the endeavor of getting you that pay at the same level you did for us. Fair?