Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
I can't find where the 9th said "internal union dispute".
There is this quote...The dissent appears implicitly to assume that the
Nicolau Award, the product of the internal rules and processes of ALPA,
is binding on USAPA.
Don't see "Internal union dispute" in there. I see product of the internal rules and process of ALPA. That process included and ended with "binding arbitration", and no judge, including the liberals at the 9th are going to toss a binding arbitration.
All I see in the conclusion is not ripe, and you are correct, they said exactly when it would become ripe, and spelled out exactly why usapa will lose when it becomes "unquestionably ripe".
CONCLUSION
[10] For the foregoing reasons, we hold that Plaintiffs’
DFR claim is not ripe; therefore, the case is REMANDED to
the district court with directions that the action be DISMISSED.
No costs to either side.
No worries though, the West will not have a ripe case, because the company is going to tell uspa to shove their DOH pipedream.
The quantity of one's words is inversely proportional to the quantity of one's worry.