As serious question, not a jab or bait.
I don't have the transcript in front me of either, but I took the above quote to mean Judge Wake's court since it is in the 9th circuit. Is that right? What did you take from her statement that the court was hesitant to intervene in collective bargaining, or words something like that?
Disclaimer-Again, I do not have anything in front of me to quote so everything is paraphrased as I remember it.
I took Judge Silver to mean the 9th is the court that, "certainly the COURT embraced the issue". No question. In their dicta, the 9th absolutely says the West is harmed, however, (again paraphrasing) " prematurely finding for the west could actually prolong the process, not give a quick remedy".
Which brings up an even bigger question, and I know Swan is going to love this. The non-erased, precedent setting 9th, said the West is being harmed.
Is being harmed, not will be harmed once a JCBA is ratified, means damages started to accrue when usapa started harming. Now, the West can't win the suit until there is a joint contract, but, there is plenty of evidence, including the 9ths quotable dicta, that says, well back in 2008, the West was being harmed.
Damages started to accrue back in 2008, if for no other reason, usapa was extorting money from the West, under the guise of being the legal CBA. Well, how much money has usapa collected from the West for their past 3 years of failling in their DFR to the West? I am thinking usapa is in the hole over 10 million just for wrongfully collected dues monies. Now add in intentionally forcing seperate ops to favor east pilots, protecting them from furloughs, downgrades etc.,suffered on the West and usapa is way deep in the hole, if they finally pass a non-Nic CBA.
Finally, I took the "courts loathe interveneing into collective bargaining" to mean just that. Bussinesses, Unions, Individuals can make deals, enter contracts, negotiate amongst themselves all they want, why should the courts intervene? But once one side reneges and breaches their contracts, then the courts can step in. That is the entire "not ripe" ruling the 9th delivered. Until the non-Nic CBA is actually passed, negotiations are still ongoing, and there is no real remedy the courts can provide. Instead of Wakes injunction ordering usapa to negotiate for the Nic, usapa now has an appelate court telling them, you get this passed, negotiations have then concluded, then usapa is "unquestionably" in breach and "unquestionalby" liable, and the courts can them order remedy, so NEGOTIATE away, just keep in mind usapa has a DFR to the West also, and the West has a contract with the east and the company that says NICOLAU.