US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Graceson]

You prefer an individualized, subjective definition of fair that is different from person to person? How does the term "fair" have any meaning if there is no objective standard of measure as to what constitutes "fair". Is fair/unfair a feeling or a fact? if its a fact then once all the emotional overtones are removed anyone can determine what is or is not fair based on a pre-determined set of criteria.

Nice work.

All of the above. All elements are weighed to appraise fair value --- before the proposal.

The proposal always exceeds fair value by any measure. It can be accepted, rejected, or countered, unless it ventures beyond some degree of wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, or gluttony. Just ask the Secret Service.

Yes, both parties have ventured beyond a degree of excess. At one stage there was tolerable value nearer to fair in the mind of each party. But not absolute fair value, considering all the elements you mention. Absolutes don't exist. Especially absolute fair in a proposal. But because of those pesky deadly sins, neither party would show their hand.

Your weakness (east and west) is that you fail to define your measure of value within your profession and thus cannot define your strength to succeed.

 

[Move2CLT]

Parker stated unequivocally at the CLT crew news that COC is dead.

Another east hope trashed.

So what's next on your list?

 

[CallawayGolf]

Nice work.

All of the above. All elements are weighed to appraise fair value --- before the proposal.

The proposal always exceeds fair value by any measure. It can be accepted, rejected, or countered, unless it ventures beyond some degree of wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, or gluttony. Just ask the Secret Service.

Yes, both parties have ventured beyond a degree of excess. At one stage there was tolerable value nearer to fair in the mind of each party. But not absolute fair value, considering all the elements you mention. Absolutes don't exist. Especially absolute fair in a proposal. But because of those pesky deadly sins, neither party would show their hand.

Your weakness (east and west) is that you fail to define your measure of value within your profession and thus cannot define your strength to succeed.

Please clarify... Is is absolutely true that there are no absolutes? If there are no absolutes then isn't absolutely true that there are no absolutes? And if it's absolutely true that there are no absolutes, then the statement about there being no absolutes is false. There are in fact absolutes by your own confession about there being no absolutes.

 

[Graceson]

Absolutely...

 

[BoeingBoy]

Meaningful communication requires an agreement on the definitions and range of meanings of a word but I guess your not interested in that since "you think we're done here".

EastUS never is interested in meaningful communication. Only in being verbose and obtuse...

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

"we the Jury...

Perhaps you would like to join the conversation with a relevant point..

Golfcart posited that it is false to say that proposals are inherantly unfair (He believes proposals can be fair.) He has a good position on the matter but he provided a convoluted, burdensome line of reasoning.. When all he had to do was provide a statement from the 9th that proves a multitude of proposals are in fact not unfair.. ie. "wide range of reasonableness". Golfcart only had to show one fair proposal to prove his point but he failed to use the 9th's proof that there are a multitude of fair proposals. Your turn, stay on topic.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Perhaps you would like to join the conversation with a relevant point..

Golfcart posited that it is false to say that proposals are inherantly unfair (He believes proposals can be fair.) He has a good position on the matter but he provided a convoluted, burdensome line of reasoning.. When all he had to do was provide a statement from the 9th that proves a multitude of proposals are in fact not unfair.. ie. "wide range of reasonableness". Golfcart only had to show one fair proposal to prove his point but he failed to use the 9th's proof that there are a multitude of fair proposals. Your turn, stay on topic.

The Nicolau Award is fair by contractual definition as defined by the TA, by ALPA merger policy, and in compliance with the RLA. That's the best example we have on this topic, and the 9th never said a word about the award not being fair.

 

[nic4us]

Perhaps you would like to join the conversation with a relevant point..

Golfcart posited that it is false to say that proposals are inherantly unfair (He believes proposals can be fair.) He has a good position on the matter but he provided a convoluted, burdensome line of reasoning.. When all he had to do was provide a statement from the 9th that proves a multitude of proposals are in fact not unfair.. ie. "wide range of reasonableness". Golfcart only had to show one fair proposal to prove his point but he failed to use the 9th's proof that there are a multitude of fair proposals. Your turn, stay on topic.

Did the 9th make any statements that the Nic was "unfair"?

So, there you have it. Phoenix has proven the Nic to be a "fair" award, as the most obvious reasoning for ripeness offered by the 9th would be,,,"hey, usapa could still use the Nic".

 

[Phoenix]

.

Your weakness (east and west) is that you fail to define your measure of value within your profession and thus cannot define your strength to succeed.

Forgive me for not going half cocked about absolutes rabbit trails ...

Your observation about "measure of value in the profession" is the heart of the cause for the internal union dispute. It isn't that it can't be defined, it is that there is no agreement on the definition (despite the multitude of millions of dollars paid in dues by tens of thousands of pilots across decades and decades of the profession that is far more profitable to exploit than define.)

 

[Phoenix]

Did the 9th make any statements that the Nic was "unfair"?

So, there you have it. Phoenix has proven the Nic to be a "fair" award, as the most obvious reasoning for ripeness offered by the 9th would be,,,"hey, usapa could still use the Nic".

They said it could not be ratified and that if USAPA was forced to propose the NIC it would prolong the dispute, but even you could have figured that out by now. p.s you are off topic.

 

[Phoenix]

The Nicolau Award is fair by contractual definition as defined by the TA, by ALPA merger policy, and in compliance with the RLA. That's the best example we have on this topic, and the 9th never said a word about the award not being fair.

Wide range of reasonableness, means that a multitude of proposals are not unfair. Try to stick to your own argument.

 

[traderjake]

If there are no absolutes then isn't absolutely true that there are no absolutes? And if it's absolutely true that there are no absolutes, then the statement about there being no absolutes is false. There are in fact absolutes by your own confession about there being no absolutes.

Try this one:

"This statement is false."

When the above statement is true it's false, and when it's false it's true.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Wide range of reasonableness, means that a multitude of proposals are not unfair. Try to stick to your own argument.

I didn't say other proposals couldn't also meet the definition of "fair" prior to the binding arbitration being awarded. However, subsequent to May 1, 2007 there is only one seniority list that meets the definition of fair per USAPA's statutory duty under the RLA and the collective bargaining agreement known as the TA. The 9th did suggest that USAPA might make a proposal that would not result in another west DFR lawsuit, but it should be clear that USAPA would not offer a list more beneficial to the west than the NIC and also that the west will vigorously defend their rights if a list strips away any of the rights granted under binding arbitration. The wide range of reasonableness provision cannot be used to violate an already existing an binding collective bargaining agreement such as the TA.

 

[nic4us]

They said it could not be ratified and that if USAPA was forced to propose the NIC it would prolong the dispute, but even you could have figured that out by now. p.s you are off topic.

Nope, again you are wrong. Here is what the 9th said.

​

The present impasse,​

in fact, could well be prolonged by prematurely resolving the West Pilots’​

claim judicially at this point. Forced to bargain for the Nicolau Award, any​

contract USAPA could negotiate would undoubtedly be rejected by its​

membership. By deferring judicial intervention, we leave USAPA to bargain​

in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interests of all members​

— both East and West — in mind, under pain of an unquestionably ripe​

DFR suit, once a contract is ratified.

Not "could not be ratified"...but "UNDOUBTEDLY BE REJECTED BY ITS MEMBERSHIP" The same majority membership who brought the DFR upon usapa in the first place.

I figured out long ago what the 9th said....unlike the official usapa communications from the likes James (continental scab ) Ray, that deny the 9th made any mention of the warnings in their ruling.

But, back to topic.....bottom line..."fair" is neither definable of absolute. But, usapa is in no position to define it, and absolutely still nothing more than a bunch of whining reneging malcontents.

 

[Pi brat]

There is very little chance that APA would try to screw the West the way lUSAPA did.

What's the downside for the West?

Really? Have you followed AA's history on SLI's? The west seems to think the east can take it in the shorts and not them. Despite their cactus love, we are one group. AA pilots will do what is best for THEM. All this love fest will fade when it comes to a SLI.