US Pilots Labor Discussion 8/11- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[Ames]

You are simply in denial of the fact that the East kept its commitments and tossed out the leeching parasite that didn't.

You can't be serious. Please explain this one. I'm all ears.....

 

[Phoenix]

Perhaps not honoring one's agreements is sophomoric behavior. Pointing out that those who conduct themselves in such a manner lacks in basic human morality is certainly not sophomoric.

My epiphany - I think not. You're either willing ignorant of what the implications of the lack of ripeness ruling are and are not, or you are unable to comprehend that lacking ripeness today doesn't mean lacking ripeness on this issue forever. Therefore what the court concluded was currently an internal matter will soon become a matter fully ripe for adjudication unless USAPA pursues a different course of action. You can jump on the word internal all you like, but it only serves to show you haven’t grasped what the majority opinion was actually saying.

Oh, basic human morality. Not only is USAPA responsible for world hunger, acid rain, and global warming... did ya know they steal from baby milk factories too. Alas, the 9th was a little busy and wasn't able to give these matters proper attention, thus.. alas, alack.. USAPA will continue to run amok. Maybe next time the court will properly attend to the issues.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Oh, basic human morality. Not only is USAPA responsible for world hunger, acid rain, and global warming... did ya know they steal from baby milk factories too. Alas, the 9th was a little busy and wasn't able to give these matters proper attention, thus.. alas, alack.. USAPA will continue to run amok. Maybe next time the court will properly attend to the issues.

I see you have decided to take an escape from reality. Have a pleasant trip.

 

[john john]

It’s quite a simple concept that honoring ones agreements is foundational to the definition or morality and integrity.

So if a group of USAirways pilots do not honor USPA agreements they are by your definition

 

[Pi brat]

So if a group of USAirways pilots do not honor USPA agreements they are by your definition

That's an interesting take john john. The west pilots are legally represented by USAPA, just like the east pilots were legally represented by ALPA. So if we were morally bound by ALPA's policies, procedures and outcomes as they say, by extension they are morally bound by those of USAPA. So the way the west sees it they are morally required to support DOH? :blink:

 

[nic4us]

So if a group of USAirways pilots do not honor USPA agreements they are by your definition

Pilots unwilling to jump out of a perfectly good airplane????(US Parachute Assoc)???

LCC pilots unwilling to honor usapa agreements, would by definition be non-member objectors, who have told the association of theives that they do not adhere to their morally bankrupt course of action, and will not play along in its illegal unfolding.

NMB certification does not make what usapa is doing ethical, moral, righteous or justifiable. usapa is nothing more than a bunch of disgruntled whinners who hold the majority at LCC, and are trying to use that majority status to steal something they do not have from their co-workers.

The entire point of being an objector is to distance oneself from this amoral behavior. Where the rank and file east pilots who formed usapa all ALPA objectors?

 

[Phoenix]

... would by definition be non-member objectors, who have told the association of theives that they do not adhere to their morally bankrupt course of action, and will not play along in its illegal unfolding....

AOL should have had you on retainer.

If any of you want to participate in resolving the internal union dispute, you'll have to move past the "Ahmadinejad" type rhetoric and accept the reality of the system you are working in. It is what it is. All the little gold stars on our kindergarten attendance sheets don't have any affect on the present (But of course I do acknowledge that you guys are way better than us because you have more gold stars, you don't beat your dog, and you help little old ladies across the busy streets).

 

[Pi brat]

Pilots unwilling to jump out of a perfectly good airplane????(US Parachute Assoc)???

LCC pilots unwilling to honor usapa agreements, would by definition be non-member objectors, who have told the association of theives that they do not adhere to their morally bankrupt course of action, and will not play along in its illegal unfolding.

NMB certification does not make what usapa is doing ethical, moral, righteous or justifiable. usapa is nothing more than a bunch of disgruntled whinners who hold the majority at LCC, and are trying to use that majority status to steal something they do not have from their co-workers.

The entire point of being an objector is to distance oneself from this amoral behavior. Where the rank and file east pilots who formed usapa all ALPA objectors?

So, if I had been an objector with ALPA I would be in a perfectly moral position to renounce the Nic award? How about the moral obligation to become a member so you can defend your fellow pilot against abuse? You can't do that as an objector(as I pointed out to Trader Jake when I asked him what he had done to defend the C18). The ultimate moral high ground would be to quit your jobs, as it is a condition of employment here to be represented by and pay dues to USAPA.

Come on Nic, you are a smart guy. This whole moral basis for what either side is doing is silly. Do we really want to go there. Most moral codes are shaped by religion, so which ones do we follow? Those that think it it okay to blow people up that don't believe in their God? Those that think that even though murder is against the law in this country and one of Christianities big 10s, it's okay to bomb an abortion clinic? Do I follow an eye for an eye, or turn the other cheek?

Instead of turning each other into Saints or Villains , why don't we leave it at a disagreement, let the courts settle it out and when we die we will find out who had the real moral high ground.

 

[CallawayGolf]

That's an interesting take john john. The west pilots are legally represented by USAPA, just like the east pilots were legally represented by ALPA. So if we were morally bound by ALPA's policies, procedures and outcomes as they say, by extension they are morally bound by those of USAPA. So the way the west sees it they are morally required to support DOH? :blink:

There is a legal and ethical framework within which an individual can express his objections in this situation. The east pilots were free to pursue all legal avenues against ALPA for what they perceived as wrong conduct on the part of ALPA. Filing a DFR against ALPA would have been one course of action. Becoming an objector would be another. Still another course of action would have been to work within ALPA to change the merger and integration rules so that the next time a merger occurs, it could be done according to the new system and policies that he helped to develop. All of these things could have and should have been done. If that were the case no one would level the charge of moral bankruptcy against an East pilot for pursuing his rights within this legal and ethical framework.

Of course the single most important action any east pilot could have taken would have been to ensure that the seniority issue never made it to binding arbitration in the first place. From the first announcement of the merger the East pilots could have started speaking out in favor of a compromised position that allowed both sides to win some points, but not all. It should go without saying that this whole mess never needed to go to an arbitrator, but it did and his decision is, was, and will be final and binding on all US pilots. His decision could be compared to a SCOTUS decision in that there is no other avenue to pursue once his ruling was made. Arbitration was the last stop in the process and a person can either accept it and go forward or quit as the only other way of escaping the arbitration award. Fighting against or dismissing the results of binding arbitration is where the mantle of moral bankruptcy becomes applicable.

Your speculation implies that the typical west pilot will not abide by the agreements made by USAPA (assuming they are capable of producing an agreement/CBA). I don’t think that is the case. I presume that if a new CBA were passed tomorrow with DOH as the seniority system that the West pilots would operate under that CBA while following the ethical pathway of bringing a new DFR suit in an attempt to correct the illegal and shameful conduct that USAPA had engaged in. There is nothing unethical or immoral about going court to seek justice when all other out-of-court options have been exhausted. I’m not even sure how the minority West pilots could fail to abide by such an agreement. Would he show up to work and wrestle an East pilot out of the cockpit claiming that he will only honor the NIC and not DOH? This is of course absurd and futile in addition to violating basic human decency of conduct. The point is that the East, because they are the majority, have the power to collectively act in an unethical manner in ways that are simply not available to the West even if the West didn’t care about moral/ethical conduct.

 

[Pi brat]

There is a legal and ethical framework within which an individual can express his objections in this situation. The east pilots were free to pursue all legal avenues against ALPA for what they perceived as wrong conduct on the part of ALPA. Filing a DFR against ALPA would have been one course of action. Becoming an objector would be another. Still another course of action would have been to work within ALPA to change the merger and integration rules so that the next time a merger occurs, it could be done according to the new system and policies that he helped to develop. All of these things could have and should have been done. If that were the case no one would level the charge of moral bankruptcy against an East pilot for pursuing his rights within this legal and ethical framework.

Of course the single most important action any east pilot could have taken would have been to ensure that the seniority issue never made it to binding arbitration in the first place. From the first announcement of the merger the East pilots could have started speaking out in favor of a compromised position that allowed both sides to win some points, but not all. It should go without saying that this whole mess never needed to go to an arbitrator, but it did and his decision is, was, and will be final and binding on all US pilots. His decision could be compared to a SCOTUS decision in that there is no other avenue to pursue once his ruling was made. Arbitration was the last stop in the process and a person can either accept it and go forward or quit as the only other way of escaping the arbitration award. Fighting against or dismissing the results of binding arbitration is where the mantle of moral bankruptcy becomes applicable.

Your speculation implies that the typical west pilot will not abide by the agreements made by USAPA (assuming they are capable of producing an agreement/CBA). I don’t think that is the case. I presume that if a new CBA were passed tomorrow with DOH as the seniority system that the West pilots would operate under that CBA while following the ethical pathway of bringing a new DFR suit in an attempt to correct the illegal and shameful conduct that USAPA had engaged in. There is nothing unethical or immoral about going court to seek justice when all other out-of-court options have been exhausted. I’m not even sure how the minority West pilots could fail to abide by such an agreement. Would he show up to work and wrestle an East pilot out of the cockpit claiming that he will only honor the NIC and not DOH? This is of course absurd and futile in addition to violating basic human decency of conduct. The point is that the East, because they are the majority, have the power to collectively act in an unethical manner in ways that are simply not available to the West even if the West didn’t care about moral/ethical conduct.

That is all YOUR opinion of what is moral and ethical. I do not attend the Church of Calloway Golf, so I can't agree with you and all of it. At the very basis of this fight the east pilots feel that Nicolau did not follow the intent of the merger policy and the result is unethical and, to some, immoral. Their opinion is just like yours, an opinion, and it will be up to our court of laws to decide what was, and is ,legal. It does give me comfort to know that if USAPA is successful in the end, I will not hear another peep from the moral high ground west.

There are ALWAYS many avenues of appeal. I think it was CLTROA that brought up the American Revolution, and I think that is a good example. The patriots were breaking the law! Do you protest on July 4th?

I just shake my head when I hear guys talk of this as an ethical battle, or as the resent CLT update put it, a war. It is neither.

It's kind of funny that when it suits guys they argue fairness, but when they feel they are winning in court, fairness doesn't matter, it's the process that matters.

 

[CallawayGolf]

So, if I had been an objector with ALPA I would be in a perfectly moral position to renounce the Nic award? How about the moral obligation to become a member so you can defend your fellow pilot against abuse? You can't do that as an objector(as I pointed out to Trader Jake when I asked him what he had done to defend the C18). The ultimate moral high ground would be to quit your jobs, as it is a condition of employment here to be represented by and pay dues to USAPA.

Come on Nic, you are a smart guy. This whole moral basis for what either side is doing is silly. Do we really want to go there. Most moral codes are shaped by religion, so which ones do we follow? Those that think it it okay to blow people up that don't believe in their God? Those that think that even though murder is against the law in this country and one of Christianities big 10s, it's okay to bomb an abortion clinic? Do I follow an eye for an eye, or turn the other cheek?

Instead of turning each other into Saints or Villains , why don't we leave it at a disagreement, let the courts settle it out and when we die we will find out who had the real moral high ground.

Contract law or making covenants has been around since man first chiseled words onto stone or put ink to animal skins. The original idea of making a unilateral or bilateral covenant was that a person making such an agreement was giving the other party the full right to execute the penalty for breach. Breaking the covenant had significant consequences usually death, hence the term “to cut a covenant”. In other words in making a covenant I agree that you have the right to take my life if I don’t abide by the terms of the agreement. The injured party couldn’t be charged with a fault or crime for pursuing his rights for the breach of covenant.

This doesn’t have to be about a specific belief system; feel free to present for all to see any world religion that purports that covenant/contract breach is considered a moral or sanctioned approach to dealing with another human being. If you don’t care for the religious-based beliefs on morality, then perhaps you can find a system of government where breach of contract is considered legal and ethical. I’ll stand by while you do your research.

 

[Pi brat]

Contract law or making covenants has been around since man first chiseled words onto stone or put ink to animal skins.

Well Duh, thank you professor. Since it is so easy and clear to see what an agreement meant, or what the intent was, why the need for courts? Why do we need the grievance process for our contract?

Questions-do you think that ALPA has do everything in it's history properly? Do you think there have ever been any pilots that were wronged that didn't have it made right? If you were wronged by an organization and in the first step in the process lost your appeal, would you stop there and say, "Oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles"? Why did the patriots take their grievances outside the established process?

Each side of this 3 way fight is doing whatever it can to win, period. How many of you withheld your dues money until an arbitrator told you you had to pay? That was not right, was it? Oh, that's right, when it is your moral fight it's okay to disobey the rules.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Well Duh, thank you professor. Since it is so easy and clear to see what an agreement meant, or what the intent was, why the need for courts? Why do we need the grievance process for our contract?

Questions-do you think that ALPA has do everything in it's history properly? Do you think there have ever been any pilots that were wronged that didn't have it made right? If you were wronged by an organization and in the first step in the process lost your appeal, would you stop there and say, "Oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles"? Why did the patriots take their grievances outside the established process?

Each side of this 3 way fight is doing whatever it can to win, period. How many of you withheld your dues money until an arbitrator told you you had to pay? That was not right, was it? Oh, that's right, when it is your moral fight it's okay to disobey the rules.

I don’t think any person or organization has done everything right. We are all capable of making an error and I’m sure the list of ALPA errors would fill volumes of books. Life isn’t fair and we have probably all been wronged by a person or an organization at some point. It’s how we respond to that unfair treatment that defines our moral character. Some people go postal in response to a perceived injustice; others may acquiesce to the situation believing that justice will prevail at some point in this life or in the eternal life to come. In between these two responses is one that seeks to right the wrong without engaging in conduct that is equally wrong, illegal or immoral. Going to court in pursuit of justice would be an example of a reasoned and ethical response to a wrong that was committed.

I also think replacing ALPA was a perfectly acceptable response for East pilot frustration. However, USAPA cannot simply ignore the previous covenants made by the previous CBA in a legal/ethical framework. The justice the East pilots sought was fully realized when ALPA was decertified. Avoiding the NIC implementation does not fall into the same category as doing so would be illegal and unethical. All US pilots should be pressuring USAPA to accept the NIC in order to move the process along to get a new and better CBA, and to ensure that USAPA doesn’t compound the "wrongs" of ALPA by breaching their legally binding agreements. It is just the right thing to do by any objective standard of conduct.

While the America Revolution may seem like a good example, it falls short in being a comparable situation. Did the colonists ask for or vote on having the New World be declared a territory of Great Britain? Did they sign an agreement stating that the New World should be taxed by the English crown in exchange for some other benefit? The answer is of course “no”. Britain sought to imperialistically control the colonists of the new World even though they had no claim or right to do so. As such Britain’s laws were not binding on the colonists in the same way that Germany’s laws under Hitler had no real authority over the citizens of France for example. The American Revolution was morally justified because Britain lacked legitimacy on their claim of control for the New World. A pilot claiming that ALPA or USAPA has no legitimate right to represent them or that they are not bound by the agreements made by the same is completely baseless. Thus, comparing USAPA’s illegal actions to those of these great America patriots, who advanced the cause of freedom and democracy while suffering great personal harm, is rather shameful IMO.

 

[Pi brat]

All US pilots should be pressuring USAPA to accept the NIC in order to move the process along to get a new and better CBA, and to ensure that USAPA doesn’t compound the "wrongs" of ALPA by breaching their legally binding agreements. It is just the right thing to do by any objective standard of conduct.

Thus, comparing USAPA’s illegal actions to those of these great America patriots, who advanced the cause of freedom and democracy while suffering great personal harm, is rather shameful IMO.

IMHO is the best thing you have written and should be applied to all you have written because in the end that is what it is, IYHO. Just like what I write is IMHO. How about the dues example? Are west pilots morally corrupt because they didn't pay their dues until forced to, and some still haven't. It's the rules, can we pick and choose or not? The vast majority of west pilots played it that way, so does it make the west pilots as a group corrupt? I don't think so, just trying a tactic to defend what they see is right.

The comparison of this to the American Revolution is over the top, as is calling it a war. The point is we all make judgment calls on what is right and what is wrong and what to do about it.

It funny to me that the west pilots see the east as an aberration, as if Allegheny, US Air, Piedmont, PSA, Empire, Eastern and Trump all managed to find morally corrupt people to hire. I feel very, very confident that if you took a sample of west pilots, went back in time and changed places with a number of east pilots, you would have the same outcome.

 

[nic4us]

If any of you want to participate in resolving the internal union dispute, you'll have to move past the "Ahmadinejad" type rhetoric and accept the reality of the system you are working in. It is what it is.

I am participating within the system. The system is much larger than usapa and their discriminatory C&BLs.

usapa "is what it is" because a bunch of disgruntled malcontents are trying to use their majority status to reneg on contractual obligations and a binding arbitration.

The "internal union dispute" was resolved by that binding arbitration. No court has affirmed usapa's position. Indeed, evey impartial third party impartial judge to the matter has sided against the position usapa has taken, and the 9th has warned them what the outcome will be if the behavior continues. But you will never read that in a CLT or PHL update.

Bottom line. Use anything other than the Nic, get sued, waste money, lose "unquestionably ripe DFR".