They can't cement the Nic. I highly doubt they would pick sides like this, and especially the Nic. It really doesn't make sense they would, if they could. It will be a complete re run of the process, with USAPA and APA as the "opponents" per se. The West does not have any autonomy.
And the following is why Judge Silver, like Judge Wake, will not be able to cram down anything Nicolau on anyone. They simply cannot interfere with internal union issues. If they do, then it is going to be subject to the same appeals court that rendered the last. The 9th.
Although we do not hold that a DFR claim based on a
union’s promotion of a policy is never ripe until that policy
is effectuated, we conclude that, in this case, there is too much
uncertainty standing in the way of effectuation of Plaintiffs’
harm to warrant judicial intervention at this stage. Cf. Sergeant
v. Inlandboatmen’s Union of the Pac., 346 F.3d 1196,
1200 (9th Cir. 2003) (examining Labor Management Reporting
and Disclosure Act issue “in light of the well-established
federal policy of avoiding unnecessary interference in the
internal affairs of unions and according considerable deference
to the interpretation and application of a union’s rules
and regulations”)
Swan,
In regards to this and the previous post addressed to me.
I totally understand the 9ths opinion. I completely get the ramifications of the opinion.
But, a couple of things. The 9th made conflicting statements in their dicta, and the biggest ones you quoted above.
First they say, a union does not have to effect a policy for it to be a DFR, the mere promotion of that policy could be a DFR, (and in this case is exactly what usapa was found guilty of by jurty verdict ).....but usapa has not effected the policy yet??? so case dismissed??? That is a conflicting statement that does not address the verdict.
Second, they point out the deference in regards to "internal union matters" yet ignore that this internal matter was resolved by binding arbitration and never even mention that fact. They did not want to make a statement that, hey a uniion can just ignore arbitrations, or arbitrations are meaningless in the context of unions for obvious reason, so...they just ignored the facts. They called the Nic.."the West's preferred method" or some BS like that, not the result of arbitration etc..
Here is what I learned from this BS. The court system in this country has very little to do with the dispensing of justice, and everything to do with self promotion, running a legal industry of lawyer and judge employment, which falls entirely along political lines. Wake and Bybee (both republican apointees side with contract law and arbitration) Tashima and the other affirmative action judge (both Democratic appointees side with labor and unions rights).
So, go ahead and make their day and continue the reneging whining til your hearts content. But, the Nic is and will remain the only accepted system seniority list at LCC. Just no getting around that, and no getting around the fact that any future players are not going to waste their money on your temper tantrum.
PS. your cordial post was reciprocated in kind.