US Pilots labor thread 11/5-

[Megasnoop]

Hi Snoop. First, I am not sure that Don Stevens was a "rainmaker", at least in the context of this case. Does that help?

Not really. If you say Stevens was listed “of counsel†once, fine. You brought it up, not me. He’s obviously not a rainmaker on this case. He’s gone. Right in the middle of the “8 figure†case? WHY?

I'm not fully understanding your questions on fees, so you might want to expound on it more fully. I will tell you that I expect that the plaintiffs will get a fee award. I am not saying it will be $1.8 mil, but I expect a fee award.

Last summer you were touting attorney’s fees on rule 54d, which is only an exception to the “American Rule.†It doesn't work here. “American Rule†is when winner/loser pay their own fees. 54d spells out 4 exceptions. 3 don’t apply here (suits against the government, common fund suits and contract language fees provisions). That leaves collecting attorney’s fees only in the case of “bad faith.†That’s not “bad faith†leading up to the case being filed, that’s bad faith where one party has willfully disobeyed a court order during the trial or dragging out the process with frivolous motions and stupid depositions to run up the tab on the other side. See “F.D. Rich Co. v. Industrial Lumber Co., 417 U.S. 116, 129 (1974); accord Alyeska Pipeline Co. v. Wilderness Society, 421 U.S. at 258-59†and paste all you want. Copyright board rules don’t allow me to post the articles, but you can find this with simply Googling “Attorneys fees, the American Rule.†The best explanation is Civil Resource Manual, ch.220 at justice.gov. The gov uses big words to describe bad faith like “vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons." I did all the work for you.

HP, I’m not a pro on this legal stuff like you. All I know is where my aged “of counsel†uncle tells me to go.

Even with 54d allowing bad faith fees, Wake’s problem was he couldn’t find any bad faith during trial or before trial. He didn’t exactly say it that way in oral arguments after trial. He just said he couldn’t see any grounds for fees. I’m sure you can find the exact quote. Deep pockets ALPA may come to the rescue on this one. Why do you think USAPA wants this transferred to a DC court? That’s where the rest of the action is. It’s the Hail Mary, but Harper thinks he’s discovered a bad faith conspiracy between ALPA and USAPA dating back to before USAPA started its card drive. It’s too long to summarize. Anyone going to http://www.unfactualbias.com can read what their saying. It’s sarcastic, but they make their point.

If Harper gets a bad faith payday, it might be a good thing for USAPA in a weird way. If he can prove the allegation that the East MEC and USAPA conspired to screw the West, he gets loads of $$. Whose $$? Not USAPA. They got no $$, except assessing members, including those doing the suing. If members refuse to pay, USAPA goes BK, bye-bye. The big bucks are in DC. ALPA was the CBA before USAPA and responsible for everything the East MEC did. If the East MEC conspired, then so did ALPA. Harper shouldn’t buy the new yacht any time soon. ALPA will drag this out until your Dave O’Dell retires if they have to. Look at the TWA lawsuit, 7 years and still counting. RJ Defense took almost 10. This won’t be ALPA’s first DFR rodeo.

 

[Hawkhunter]

That's what you say. Judge Wake says you're wrong.

I didnt know Judge Wake could vote on OUR contract. I know, " Every Captain I fly with blah blah blah". The majority says your WRONG!

 

[flybynite]

It most certainly does! I need to find an east pilot to explain your system to me before I explain back how most line bidding systems can violate seniortiy that PBS would have otherwise protected.

CATCREW can't violate seniority.

 

[hp_fa]

Not really. If you say Stevens was listed “of counsel†once, fine. You brought it up, not me. He’s obviously not a rainmaker on this case. He’s gone. Right in the middle of the “8 figure†case? WHY?

I don't recall bringing that up myself, I believe I was answering someone. As for why he's gone, I have no idea.

Last summer you were touting attorney’s fees on rule 54d, which is only an exception to the “American Rule.â€

I don't recall ever citing Rule 54. I did cite Rule 23 (Class Action) which touched on Rule 54, but I don't recall ever citing Rule 54. If you can show me where my recollection is wrong I would appreciate it. I also never used the term "American Rule". That showed up for the first time either from you or from SSM&P in Response to Plaintiffs' Motion fpr Attorneys' Fees.

That leaves collecting attorney’s fees only in the case of “bad faith.†That’s not “bad faith†leading up to the case being filed, that’s bad faith where one party has willfully disobeyed a court order during the trial or dragging out the process with frivolous motions and stupid depositions to run up the tab on the other side.

We are going to have a real good idea on what constitutes bad faith and whether it is applicable in this case. We may get an idea on 12/8 at the oral argument and will know for sure once the opinion is released. There are a lot of open questions regarding bad faith in this case and I dare say that this case will, one way or another, be cited for years to come and probably in labor law classes.

HP, I’m not a pro on this legal stuff like you. All I know is where my aged “of counsel†uncle tells me to go.

Are you sure you aren't USAPA's new counsel? Your aged uncle and some of USAPA's stuff seem to come about at the same time and use the same terminology.

Even with 54d allowing bad faith fees, Wake’s problem was he couldn’t find any bad faith during trial or before trial. He didn’t exactly say it that way in oral arguments after trial. He just said he couldn’t see any grounds for fees. I’m sure you can find the exact quote. Deep pockets ALPA may come to the rescue on this one. Why do you think USAPA wants this transferred to a DC court? That’s where the rest of the action is. It’s the Hail Mary, but Harper thinks he’s discovered a bad faith conspiracy between ALPA and USAPA dating back to before USAPA started its card drive. It’s too long to summarize. Anyone going to http://www.unfactualbias.com can read what their saying. It’s sarcastic, but they make their point.

It's funny that you raise the venue issue. I have stayed out of that because, believe it or not, I have been trying to not toss any Molotov Cocktails. However, that said and in response to your query, it is my personal belief that Judge Wake may take Seham to the woodshed over the venue issue in light of it being raised after a partial judgment has been entered in this case. To be real honest, I have never heard of such a stupid maneuver. This one may be worthy of an actual bar complaint.

Also, as I recall, Wake did find bad faith and it was noted in his 53-page Finding of Facts.

If Harper gets a bad faith payday, it might be a good thing for USAPA in a weird way. If he can prove the allegation that the East MEC and USAPA conspired to screw the West, he gets loads of $$. Whose $$? Not USAPA. They got no $$, except assessing members, including those doing the suing. If members refuse to pay, USAPA goes BK, bye-bye. The big bucks are in DC. ALPA was the CBA before USAPA and responsible for everything the East MEC did. If the East MEC conspired, then so did ALPA. Harper shouldn’t buy the new yacht any time soon. ALPA will drag this out until your Dave O’Dell retires if they have to. Look at the TWA lawsuit, 7 years and still counting. RJ Defense took almost 10. This won’t be ALPA’s first DFR rodeo.

Some folks here would be quite please if USAPA would go away. However, I don't think they can sucessfully go bankrupt with their sources of revenue. Also, I wonder if USAPA were to attempt to go bankrupt whether the BK trustee would file an action in BK against SSM&P for disgorgement of fees based upon their professional advice leading to the litigation, judgment and eventual BK of USAPA.

 

[Metroyet]

Not really. If you say Stevens was listed “of counselâ€￾ once, fine. You brought it up, not me. He’s obviously not a rainmaker on this case. He’s gone. Right in the middle of the “8 figureâ€￾ case? WHY?

Lemme guess the Eastie Fantasy thought process here. I bet it goes a little something like this:

"Clearly Stevens is concerned that USAPAs appeal is going to prevail. He wants to jump off the sinking ship...the USS Addington before it's too late."

Yeah!! that's the ticket!!!

Could it be that the vast majority of the work has been completed and he simply has other cases to attend to?

He already destroyed Seham and mopped the floor with Cleary and his sidekick Lurch. What else is there to do?

 

[exB717Flyer]

The system that we use (CATCREW) is very complex.

No sure if you've been following the conversation closely but we're not talking about Maestro or Catcrew. PBS is only used to build the schedule. Any subsequent changes are done with Maestro which we very much want to dump for a web-based system.

 

[flybynite]

No sure if you've been following the conversation closely but we're not talking about Maestro or Catcrew. PBS is only used to build the schedule. Any subsequent changes are done with Maestro which we very much want to dump for a web-based system.

Well, yes, I have been following the conversation. The problem is you guys keep jumping around about your legal issues. Of which I'm sooo over. <_<

And I know the difference between CATCREW, Maestro, and PBS.

We'd have to go back several pages on this thread for me to explain. Sheesh......you guys are like herding cats.

PBS is a means to build "your" schedule. And from what little I'm hearing from you guys.....the "PBS software" that's being promoted by the company violates seniority rights. In other words...the software isn't sophisticated enough to address this ONE issue. God knows what else it doesn't address. And the company isn't willing to address it..or pay for it.....they could give rats butt about it.

Big no-no as far as I'm concerned as well as the rest of AFA.

And yes, I'm aware ya'll want and need to dump Maestro. It's the cheapest software system out there. It needs to go bye-bye.

And what you fail to understand also, is I'm talking about CATCREW for a reason. It addresses all of our scheduling concerns, keeps track of our schedules, does all of our bidding and helps prevent contract violations. It's pretty cool. I'm impressed.

I'm not willing to throw CATCREW under the bus. And that's why I'm trying to talk to you fellas on the west end about it. I want you guys to open your eyes. Everything on the east isn't bad or bad for you. And PBS isn't that big a deal...

IMO, PBS is nothing more than a way for the company to slither past it's contractual obligations.
<_<

 

[exB717Flyer]

As Steve Martin used to say, "Well excu-u-u-u-u-use me!"

I'm sure I can be forgiven for thinking you were changing the topic considering the conversation was about the pros and cons of line bidding versus PBS. I'm sure catcrew is better than maestro. Happy?

 

[luvn737s]

The seniority issue with PBS as I understand it, is this: Take two pilots. The bid choice of the senior one cannot make the junior one illegal. If it does, it does not award the choice to the senior pilot. I don't think that it is often the case that seniority No.1 is affected by the legality of seniority No. 1500. I would think that the issues would be between pilots of fairly close seniority. The solution could be to build the lines per seniority allowing temporary illegalities, then adjust the trips before putting them on the pilot's lines. Other solutions could be had as well, but they will come at some cost, probably less than the cost of staying with the Bid Sheet.

Refusing to consider PBS because 1)you don't understand it and 2) the presentation was from a west pilot is shortsighted and irresponsible.

Can someone explain how Cleary stays in office, given his poor leadership and inability to produce results?

 

[flybynite]

As Steve Martin used to say, "Well excu-u-u-u-u-use me!"

I'm sure I can be forgiven for thinking you were changing the topic considering the conversation was about the pros and cons of line bidding versus PBS. I'm sure catcrew is better than maestro. Happy?

Oh please....we can do without you drama.

And yes, you are forgiven.

 

[flybynite]

The seniority issue with PBS as I understand it, is this: Take two pilots. The bid choice of the senior one cannot make the junior one illegal. If it does, it does not award the choice to the senior pilot. I don't think that it is often the case that seniority No.1 is affected by the legality of seniority No. 1500. I would think that the issues would be between pilots of fairly close seniority. The solution could be to build the lines per seniority allowing temporary illegalities, then adjust the trips before putting them on the pilot's lines. Other solutions could be had as well, but they will come at some cost, probably less than the cost of staying with the Bid Sheet.

Refusing to consider PBS because 1)you don't understand it and 2) the presentation was from a west pilot is shortsighted and irresponsible.

Can someone explain how Cleary stays in office, given his poor leadership and inability to produce results?

I can't even begin to address the Cleary issue. That's the pilot's union stuff....so be it. Work it out.

Hello boys.... Programming 101...........

PBS is only as good as it's programming. When the company bellies up to the bar and is willing to "allow" and or "pay" for the proper programming.....then we'll talk.

You guys can fiddle about all you want to. But the AFA is clear about this. Get it in your head.........We (AFA) will not accept a PBS program that doesn't protect our members.

And seniority is the name of the game. This company doesn't respect our seniority one whit. All they are trying to do is fill in the gaps.

Please try to pay attention.

 

[cleardirect]

As far as Stevens leaving the case. The trial portion is over. We are now into the appeal part of this case. I don’t know if Don Stevens is an appeals lawyer.

Could it be possibility that he is so confident in the Addington appeal that he does not think that it will be coming back to AZ. So there is no work left for him in this case. Why hang around when he can move on to another case.

Sometimes the simple explanations are the most logical.

 

[cleardirect]

This whole concept that PBS violates seniority is getting out of hand. Line construction can also violate seniority and that is what we are talking about.

For Example. There is a small airline. 6 pilots 2 reserves. 6 pilots are contractually guaranteed lines. Each pilot flies 4 trips per month, that is 24 trips to be spread out over the 6 pilots. The lines are build where each pilot must get 4 trips and also be legal.

What happens if you come down to the end of the lines and the only lines left have 2 lines that start on the same day. Only allowing him to have three trips and the last trip has to go to the reserve. A violation of seniority. In order to fix this you have to take a good trip from the lines senior to the last guy and give him a good trip and move a worse trip into the senior line.

Another example. Same pilot set. There is one good trip that the top 3 guys always bid but the senior guy always gets. He bids this line. Now they include the training and the senior guy loses the great trip. Since the number two guy already has his line that great trip falls to a more junior pilot.

Unless you can wrestle from that junior pilot he is not going to give it up. Under PBS the training and planned absences are added first. So the most senior guy would not get the trip but it would go the next senior guy that wanted it. Therefore respecting seniority.

 

[BLT]

Both systems violate seniority. One system gives your more control. PBS is not perfect but it is better.

 

[nic4us]

Another oversimplified way line bidding violates seniority.

I am say #1. I want a trip this week that goes to SEA cause I need to hit the fish market.

Next week I want the loooong layover in Maui cause my brother and his family are going to be there and that would be nice.

The 3rd week I need to go to ORD to deliver cash to my daughter in grad school.

last week I have training.

In any line bidding system there is not going to be a line to fit all my request. With PBS I just tell it to give it to me and it does.

Which method violates seniority?