US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Pi brat]

So your computer is telling you what date the harm will occur? Your computer is telling us how much harm Nicolau will do? Great! Give me the numbers pal! You omitted them in your above post

I said I could, didn't say I would. Told the person I got them from I wouldn't. AOL has it, it show the shift of relative position for east to west, ask them for it, if you dare.

 

[prechilill]

I said I could, didn't say I would. Told the person I got them from I wouldn't. AOL has it, it show the shift of relative position for east to west, ask them for it, if you dare.

Ok, I'll just take your statement for what it is, and the rest of us know what that is. Jim is right about you...

 

[Al Legheny]

1The dissent asserts that “nothing would be gained by postponing a
decision, and the parties’ interest would be well served by a prompt resolution
of the West Pilots’ claim.” Diss. op. at 8017 (internal alterations,
quotation marks, and citation omitted). To be sure, the parties’ interest
would be served by prompt resolution of the seniority dispute, but that is
not the same as prompt resolution of the DFR claim. 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.


This is where the 9th is warning usapa about its behavior.

Read it carefully. They dismissed the DFR claim because they recognize that usapa is capable of stalling the negotiating process.

They are telling usapa, if you get a DOH contract ratified, you will lose, but, we will let you try because until you do you can merely subvert the process with delay that harms the West.

Further, Tashima prefaces the whole thing with an admittance that, "the parties' intrest would be best served with a resolution to the seniority dispute".

He is telling usapa, and the east pilots, we are not going to enforce the injunction, because we know you have already demonstrated your willingness to renege and confound the situation by delaying a joint contract. We are going to remove the injunction and see if you are stupid enough to get yourselves sue a second time, because that would actually be quicker.

Nic,

I realize that you hang your hat on this language but your analysis is distorted and tourtured. Yes there is an unquestionably riipe basis for a DFR claim. There is not a ripe DFR claim. That claim is dead and even judge Wake asked your good Dr. about the question of this claim rising from the dead, and it aint gonna happen. You can bring a new one but Addington I is dead and the findings of Judge Wake in that case will not will not be avaible to the plaintiffs in Addington II.

Addington II will be a whole new ball game and the genisis of USAPA will not be an issue. The Ninth Circuit quoted ALPA v. O'neil and stated that the Final Product of bargaining is the basis of measurement of the DFR standard.

2. The final product of the bargaining process may constitute evidence of a breach of the fair representation duty only if, in light of the factual and legal landscape, it can be fairly characterized as so far outside of a "wide range of reasonableness," Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 345 U. S. 330, 345 U. S. 338, that it is wholly "irrational" or "arbitrary." The Court of Appeals' refinement of the arbitrariness component authorizes more judicial review of the substance of negotiated agreements than is consistent with national labor policy. Congress did not intend judicial review of a union's performance to permit the court to substitute its own view of the proper bargain for that reached by the union. See, e.g., NLRB v. Insurance Agents, 361 U. S. 477, 361 U. S. 488. Rather, Congress envisioned the relationship between the courts and labor unions as similar to that between the courts and the legislature. See Steele, supra, 323 U.S. at 323 U. S. 198. Any substantive examination of a union's performance, therefore, must be highly deferential, recognizing the wide latitude that negotiators need for the effective performance of their bargaining responsibilities. Cf., e.g., Day-Brite Lighting, Inc. v. Missouri, 342 U. S. 421, 342 U. S. 423. P. 499 U. S. 78.

 

[nevergiveup]

Reality check from a west pilot!!!!!!!!! Thanks Otter, it's been a long week, I needed that!

250 million. A little less than they have saved by delaying a joint contract all these years. I think Doug and Co have played us ALL like a fiddle. We dropped this in his lap, why wouldn't he? I really don't think he is too worried about USAPA or AOL, but will play this for as long as possible, then take the road that is cheapest for US Airways. That is the road they always take.

You need to hear this: You very may well win, but it is looooooooong from over. That is not a threat or prediction, just the way I see it. Only when we both retire will we be able to say whether it was worth it.

Take care.

You could buy a nice walker with 250 mil!

 

[Barrister]

Nic,

I realize that you hang your hat on this language but your analysis is distorted and tourtured. Yes there is an unquestionably riipe basis for a DFR claim. There is not a ripe DFR claim. That claim is dead and even judge Wake asked your good Dr. about the question of this claim rising from the dead, and it aint gonna happen. You can bring a new one but Addington I is dead and the findings of Judge Wake in that case will not will not be avaible to the plaintiffs in Addington II.

Addington II will be a whole new ball game and the genisis of USAPA will not be an issue. The Ninth Circuit quoted ALPA v. O'neil and stated that the Final Product of bargaining is the basis of measurement of the DFR standard.

2. The final product of the bargaining process may constitute evidence of a breach of the fair representation duty only if, in light of the factual and legal landscape, it can be fairly characterized as so far outside of a "wide range of reasonableness," Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 345 U. S. 330, 345 U. S. 338, that it is wholly "irrational" or "arbitrary." The Court of Appeals' refinement of the arbitrariness component authorizes more judicial review of the substance of negotiated agreements than is consistent with national labor policy. Congress did not intend judicial review of a union's performance to permit the court to substitute its own view of the proper bargain for that reached by the union. See, e.g., NLRB v. Insurance Agents, 361 U. S. 477, 361 U. S. 488. Rather, Congress envisioned the relationship between the courts and labor unions as similar to that between the courts and the legislature. See Steele, supra, 323 U.S. at 323 U. S. 198. Any substantive examination of a union's performance, therefore, must be highly deferential, recognizing the wide latitude that negotiators need for the effective performance of their bargaining responsibilities. Cf., e.g., Day-Brite Lighting, Inc. v. Missouri, 342 U. S. 421, 342 U. S. 423. P. 499 U. S. 78.

Please don't confuse them with this stuff. After all, it's only the Supreme Cpourt's "opinion"

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[cleardirect]

Yeah, keep telling yourselves that, it might help. Your self-righteous cluelessness is charming.

The east refused to modify your position after being told by the arbitrator that your position would not prevail.
You cried to ALPA after you did not get your way. The east filed a law suit against the west. The east walked away from the JNC process.
The east formed a new union to avoid your obligation. The east has delayed contract negotiations because you refuse to accept the agreed to list.

Really! Tell me where I am wrong? what part is not true?

 

[OTTER574]

Please don't confuse them with this stuff. After all, it's only the Supreme Cpourt's "opinion"

NICDOA
NPJB

Please explain and quote in great detail what CASE MERITS, CONTRACT LAW the US Supreme Court ruled on in it's "opinion" regarding Addington case?

More LIES from the usapa elite?


Otter

 

[sumadarson]

Nos, etc have no compunction against taking their jabs at those on the other side. Nos is certainly not bashful about labeling those on the other side as scabs although even the link he provides proves that that was a very gray area - no legal picket line since the Aussie pilots didn't go on strike but resigned their jobs. Ironically, even the head of the Aussie union wrote a book in which he said that the HP & UA pilots didn't cross a picket line because there was no strike. Yet Nos routinely tosses the scab attack at West pilots. Where's your thin skin about scab attacks when he does?

In short, if USAPA is successful in throwing out final and binding arbitration so easily they've basically eliminated the usefulness of arbitration - something no real union would want. Hence, despite the claims of all the "friend of the court" filings that would descend on the District Court pleading USAPA's case, there were none - not a single other union filed a "friend of the court" brief on USAPA's behalf in any court so far. Despite all the East "real unionists" bs, that should tell you something about what the other unions think of USAPA and it's tactics.

Jim

ps - it's a little early for Nos to show up but I don't want him to get the impression that I don't care so:

Tick Tock Tick Tock...where's that proof Nos?

The truth of your Empire pilot staple job hurts. You are a hypocrite. You are ignorant of the facts surrounding the Australian pilot situation.

The Australian pilots had to resign;

""The President of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots explained that the writs on pilot’s family placed all assets - home, life savings and superannuation - at risk. The Federation sought legal advice, pilots had two options:-

· To place in jeopardy the family home, life savings and superannuation and continue in the hope that the Airlines and the Government might change their attitude, which I might add, they haven’t, nor will in the near future.
· To guarantee the safety of their family assets, and resign. This is what they did.""

Australian Pilot Strike link

The united and america west pilots crossed their picket line, period. The america west pilots made fun of the mothers and children of the pilots.

america west pilots making fun of strikers family link

Nice "credibility" on the "information" you spread.

Your narcissism is very evident, now that the playground attendants on this board allow us to speak.

Dementia check, boeing boy.

Hey, what about trader playing the banjo for us?

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Not sure why you addressed that to me, I've missed nothing. Maybe you can answer as no other west pilot has. Would it have been possible for the west pilots to have delayed the implementation of a joint contract/seniority list under ALPA?

Yes, it would have been possible. But, the powerplay would have been absent. Prater and alpa would have told us to pound sand. It would have been an impossibility to do anything but vote no and stew about it. I'm not sure how long that would have lasted. I'd bet we'd be done by now if Nic had gone doh.

 

[Reed Richards]

Addington II will be a whole new ball game and the genisis of USAPA will not be an issue. The Ninth Circuit quoted ALPA v. O'neil and stated that the Final Product of bargaining is the basis of measurement of the DFR standard.

Correct Al. I brought up that very fact here a while ago, and not one retort. All those depositions and evidence collected by Marty and gang on the founders and the "intent" of USAPA..nothing but wallpaper.

The Ninth indeed only ruled on ripeness. But they said much more. Their words have meaning, even more so if and when we all end up back in front of them.

RR

 

[Pi brat]

Ok, I'll just take your statement for what it is, and the rest of us know what that is. Jim is right about you...

His is? What's that sweetheart? I showed this group the numbers months back, just not the names. Ask cleardirect, he had no answer for me. Prove me wrong big girl, show me the relative positions of various east and west pilots on a Nic vs stand alone list. I dare you.

 

[Pi brat]

Yes, it would have been possible. But, the powerplay would have been absent. Prater and alpa would have told us to pound sand. It would have been an impossibility to do anything but vote no and stew about it. I'm not sure how long that would have lasted. I'd bet we'd be done by now if Nic had gone doh.

Thank you lynyrdskynrd, you are a west pilot of integrity. It would have lasted until you guys thought there was a contract worth voting yes for in exchange for a DOH list..........just as it is now in reverse.

 

[OTTER574]

Correct Al. I brought up that very fact here a while ago, and not one retort. All those depositions and evidence collected by Marty and gang on the founders and the "intent" of USAPA..nothing but wallpaper.

The Ninth indeed only ruled on ripeness. But they said much more. Their words have meaning, even more so if and when we all end up back in front of them.

RR

Pay rates have a meaning too. usapa is painted in the corner by arrogance, ignorance, incompetence and out and out LIES. I will laugh when the NMB parks the sorry usapa ass's!

Otter

 

[Pi brat]

Really! Tell me where I am wrong? what part is not true?

The west filed an unripe DFR suit that included the company, they appealed the loss in the 9th to the SCOTUS, they refused to join the legally elected union until Susie failed, they refuse to help get a contract that will make their DFR ripe.................................................................................................................................

 

[AWA320]

Pay rates have a meaning too. usapa is painted in the corner by arrogance, ignorance, incompetence and out and out LIES. I will laugh when the NMB parks the sorry usapa ass's!

Otter

Remember they dont care because its a badge of honor within usapa to be stupid. They LOVE loa 93 rates and claim they can live out their careers on Colgan Air pay rates. Haa some legacy carrier the east is huh?

AWA320