US Pilots Labor Discussion

[767jetz]

database certainly included, by the Company's own admission, pilot name, address
and passport number information, and may have included date of birth information and Social Security number, more
than enough for identity theft.

Does everything need to be explained to you? Even the simplest of concepts?

Let's take away your selective highlight and read what it ACTUALLY says:

The data base contained the stated information. That does not mean the data was used or passed on to anyone. If the info is available to the person for viewing and was not obtained by illegal means, and that data was not copied and transmitted to anyone else, then no crime was committed. So as BB already said, he probably selectively searched the database for the addresses only, which is not confidential information and can be obtained easily in many other ways from public records.

But you guys keep up your witch hunt if it suits you. Anything to feed your fantasies. Just remember the result of your last temper tantrum caused by AOL's last mailing. (What is it they say about a person repeating the same action yet expecting a different result?)

 

[Phoenix]

Uh-Huh. Sure. Right. Very Scary. Too bad USAPA already lost this one. Bottom Line.

The Horse is out of the barn. The Truth is on everybody's Kitchen table...Wives are reading it, (God help you). You can't un-explode a bomb. Pure, uncut factual information regarding the true Nature of your situation has permanently infiltrated the ranks....and there's not a damn thing baby doc douchbag kim jong Cleary and feeble crew can do about it.

I love it. I've seen the booklet. Very expensive I'd imagine. VERY VERY Expensive.

Seems like an organization absolutely flush with ca$h to me.

Cash isn't the only thing its flush with. Maybe for the next issue y'all could partner with Charmin so you'll stand half a chance anyone bothers to read it while they unroll it.

P.S. The "APLA Concerned Pilots Committee (ACPC)" was flush with more money than Leospanker ever dreamed of collecting. ACPC made a valiant attempt to save ALPA on the property and ended up doing more to cement ALPA's fate. I was delighted at all their mailings.
P.P.S. Google "ALPA Concerned Pilots Committee"--you won't find more than a trace of them. POOF!
P.P.P.S. Leospanker is a LLC for a reason.

 

[usabusdriver]

And I have come to the conclusion that you are overall just not that bright. Here was your original line:

"Here is something more relevant to our situation. Nicolau told your side that you were not going to get DOH/LOS so you had better bring something else. That was the time to work out a deal. Not after."

He told BOTH sides they weren't getting what they wanted and they should BOTH bring something else. NEITHER side did(of substance), and it takes two to make an agreement. With an offer like yours, I can't see anything we could do that would make any difference and as I've said before, why did Nic ask then? He was the mediator, did he not know by then the two sides couldn't agree? If he was left to come up with a fair decisions, just do it. Wasn't the time for asking over by then?

I guess you don't know the meaning of substantial.

You have repeatedly made the comment that the east didn't compromise. I was just pointing out that the west didn't either. It's all right there in the beloved Nic award.

PI Brat,

It seems to me that you latch onto a semantic obliquitous and tangential statement as a central focus. Then you argue minutia infinitum on the point even after it has been overcome by events or argument subsequent to the loss of the greater meaning in a flurry of electrons.

Your current fixation on “substantial” is a prime example.

The two pilot groups could not come to agreement through negotiation, mediation, or arbitration. The neutral made a final effort to move the parties towards compromise. The west made a minor change in their position, the east did not.

To argue that the east’s intransience undeterred by the imminency of the cessation of the proceedings leading to an award is unimportant because the west’s change in their position was not “substantial” is quite astounding.

Parties do not like to negotiate against themselves. As entrenched as both sides were in this matter with the forthright admonition by the neutral that neither position would prevail, a small move is indicative as an “opener” for potential movement towards compromise. Without a corresponding response from the opposing party there are only two avenues available, further compromise by the moving party or the conclusion of the proceedings.

It is therefore frivolous and inane to argue that; the determination by the east to not acquiesce to the neutrals request to change their position is cogent, compelling, or well-founded because the move by the west was not substantial.

Ok rant over. My 2 hundredths of a dollar have been rendered.

As you were, carry-on.

 

[sumadarson]

Does everything need to be explained to you? Even the simplest of concepts?

Just remember the result of your last temper tantrum caused by AOL's last mailing. (What is it they say about a person repeating the same action yet expecting a different result?)

Repeating the same actions and expecting a different result? I know what they say about that to the america west pilots: "More badge backing money please !"

9th Circuit court Dismissed

Enbanc request 9th Circuit court Denied

Clarification from 9th for damages Denied

Request stay until Writ of certiorari Denied

Motion to transfer Denied

Rule 60 b Denied

Supreme Court Are you guys serious?

Let us ride on the backs of the declaratory or we
will never get our money back from these losers..... futile

 

[BoeingBoy]

Poor Nosum, doesn't know the difference between dismissed for not being ripe and dismissed with prejudice...One means wait till the time is ripe to refile and the other means don't darken the courthouse door with that nonsense again.

Where's the proof.

Jim

 

[sumadarson]

Poor Nosum, doesn't know the difference between dismissed for not being ripe and dismissed with prejudice...One means wait till the time is ripe to refile and the other means don't darken the courthouse door with that nonsense again.

Where's the proof.

Jim

jetz has advice for you;

"What is it they say about a person repeating the same action yet expecting a different result?"

 

[BoeingBoy]

jetz has advice for you;

"What is it they say about a person repeating the same action yet expecting a different result?"

You'll have to tell me - how does repeatedly making things up and presenting them as facts work out for you? I know that for me it makes you the class clown who's flunking out of school that the other kids all laugh at (not with).

As for asking for proof, you and I both know you have none and can't get any. Never fear though, I'll be a thorn in your side until you admit that.

Jim

 

[sumadarson]

you and I both know you have and can't get any.

Jim

Hey, I am married, what can I say.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Yup, the class clown who everyone laughs at.

Jim

 

[nic4us]

As you were, carry-on.

Roger,,Wilco,,

Back to the mailing.

Okay, I have read it. Very insightful and there is no wonder why the idiots at usapa are attacking and deflecting the attention from the substance of the brochure to the non-issue of AOL has a mailing list. usapa has no counter-arguement.

Now with regard to Cleary's letter. If I were a certain former assistant chief pilot, I would consult legal cousel, then file a complaint to HR, demanding the immediate termination of one usapa president who has obviously intentionally created a hostile working enviroment. Then, if Cleary's letter was approved by the usapa communications chairman, I would seek his termination also. Bye bye Mike and Scott, maybe you can organize the Wal-mart greeters and then steal their seniority.

 

[sumadarson]

Roger,,Wilco,,

Back to the mailing.

Now with regard to Cleary's letter. If I were a certain former assistant chief pilot, I would consult legal cousel, then file a complaint to HR, demanding the immediate termination of one usapa president who has obviously intentionally created a hostile working enviroment. Then, if Cleary's letter was approved by the usapa communications chairman, I would seek his termination also.

Hearing your legal advice I have your identity narrowed down to two possible candidates with similar strategies.

Are you Marty Harper or Dr Andrew, 28j, Jacobs?

 

[BoeingBoy]

I'm still waiting on that proof Nosum

Jim

 

[sumadarson]

I'm still waiting on that proof Nosum

Jim

Boeing Boy

 

[USA320Pilot]

USAPA: Suppressing Dissenting Opinion and The Democratic Process

Quick Fact #140: Despite the monumental efforts to keep the pilots from knowing what's going on with our Union, details emerge. It takes very little imagination to recognize that USAPA can neither accept a differing opinion nor support democratic principles. Is there any doubt why we are where we are?

A note to Mike Cleary and Randy Mowrey: 1) We don't need to be protected from the ugly truth. 2) We're tired of your excuses for failure and we need positive results now.

See Story

 

[BoeingBoy]

Boeing Boy

Still playing clown and giving no proof I see...

Someone said "The truth shall set you free". You might try it at least once.

Jim