Yes, I understand very clearly what I wrote. And it gets ripe, in YOUR opinion only. Your opinion of ripeness and damage may differ very greatly from reality. So far, nobody but Wake agreed with you, and his ruling was overturned.
Swan,
First, Wake's ruling was not overturned, it was dismissed. I suppose you could say his opinion on the ripeness of the case was overturned, however, judge Wake was not alone in his opinion of ripeness. Judge Bybee agreed with him, as did the AOL legal team.
It is also the expressed opinion of the 9th, that it most certainly does get ripe upon contract ratification. "Unquestionably ripe" is the term we all know they used, infering that there is actually at the present time a question of whether it is ripe or not. In a way the 9th said, there is a question here whether this is ripe or not, we know for a fact it will become ripe upon contract ratification, so we are unwilling to make any rulings now, come back when there is a ratified contract and we can then determine with precision and lack of doubt whether any damages or harm have occured.
Well guess what, not only are the West pilots suffering harm from the discrimination of the elected CBA, but so is the company. It is in fact ripe now, has been ripe since the NMB election and damages are going to be based on when grevious harm first occured (Aug 2008).
Unless usapa adopts the Nic as its bargaining proposal, I see no way out for them. Further, if the company's request for declaratory judgement finds that usapa must use the Nic, too late, it is the Nic and damages all the way back to Aug 2008, plus west legal fees. All the company is doing is distancing itself from that trial.
In case you do not understand what I am saying, here it is. Even if usapa puts out a contract with the Nic, and it gets ratified. usapa is going to get sued for the damages and legal fees for their foray into DFR land. Once a ratified contract contains the Nic, as mandated by declaratory judgement, usapa is on the hook all by themselves (without the company and a hybrid DFR claim), for intentionally stalling the negotiating process (which is against RLA law) in its blatant DFR against the West pilot class.