Nos since you like posting links I thought I would take the liberty to post something of value for you and the rest of the UBS's. YOU LOST AGAIN!!!
AWA320 says NO to UBS's
VIAFEDEX
Richard R. Kasher, Esquire
430 Clairemont Road
Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085-1707
August 27, 2010
Re: US Airways and USAPA - Case Number BPR 09-06-02 East (Snap Back wage case)
Dear Arbitrator Kasher:
This will respond to the August 23,2010 letter sent by Union Board member Theresa Murphy. Ms. Murphy's letter requests that you delay issuing to Board members a draft Opinion in this case, instead issue only a draft Statement of Facts/Statement of Positions, and then "allow for the possible opportunity for a follow-up face-to-face executive session prior to issuing the draft Opinion." We oppose this request, for the following reasons:
1. The process suggested by Ms. Murphy will cause an additional significant delay in the conclusion of this case. This delay will occur due to her belated request for a two-step bifurcated preparation of the Opinion, and due to the request for a "face-to-face meeting." In fact, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that delay is her motive for making the request. This is not acceptable to the Company or to the many pilots affected by this grievance. As you will recall, the completion of this case has already been delayed by USAPA's prior requests. Although we finished the evidentiary hearing on February 4, 2010, we could not close the record until April 28, due to USAPA's desire to submit additional expert testimony (eventually via offer of proof, but only after counsel was required to schedule a conference call with you on April 8, to ensure that the case would be concluded without further delay). This is a grievance over staggering sums of money that USAPA chose to publicize to all the pilots. That publicity has an obvious impact on the Company and its pilots. In that circumstance, we respectfully request that USAP A not be permitted to cause any further delay to the final resolution of this case.
2. The process suggested by Ms. Murphy has the effect of allowing for a second round of advocacy, even after counsel for each party submitted extensive written briefs to you on June 11. That is inappropriate. In this regard, we note that Ms. Murphy is a lawyer in the same law firm as Ms. Edwards (counsel for USAPA in this case), and has frequently represented USAPA as its advocate in other system board hearings involving US Airways.
3. To the extent Ms. Murphy is .concerned about the accuracy of your draft Statement of Facts/Statement of Positions, she -- and all Board members -- will have a full opportunity to review and offer corrections when you circulate your full draft Opinion. That is the conventional and appropriate process. Of course, in this case, it is highly unlikely that correction will be needed as to the Statement of Facts/Statement of Positions because you have received extensive, well-written briefs from counsel for each side.
Thank you for your consideration of our opposition to Ms. Murphy's request.
Sincerely,
Paul Jones
Company Representative to the System Board of Adjustment
Beth Holdren
Company Representative to the System Board of Adjustment
Cc (via email): Theresa Murphy, Esquire
First Officer David Ciabattoni