US Pilots Labor Thread 12/30-1/5

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Hey all, Happy New Year !

Let me toss this hypothetical question out to the group. Just a hypothetical for discussion.....so no bashing, flaming, ranting etc... that most of the children have been exchanging lately ok? Just an adult, civilized debate on this one question :




What would happen if for some crazy, remote reason a Federal court declares the Nic award INVALID ??? As in technically flawed and thus unusable by any CBA ???




>>>>snip

Thanks

Perhaps a better question would be: why do you ask this question?

You will not receive a serious answer, because there aren't any. Well actually there is one answer: chaos, complete and utter.

 

[cleardirect]

Hey all, Happy New Year !

Let me toss this hypothetical question out to the group. Just a hypothetical for discussion.....so no bashing, flaming, ranting etc... that most of the children have been exchanging lately ok? Just an adult, civilized debate on this one question :

What would happen if for some crazy, remote reason a Federal court declares the Nic award INVALID ??? As in technically flawed and thus unusable by any CBA ???

Also, as I asked ClearedDirect earlier, with no response...

Can any of you connected legal types let me know when the DFR trial date is ?? If not set is there any of you who has the time line for the DFR case? Information such as expected time frames for Interrogatories, Discovery, Depositions, Motions etc... as I don't have the time to do the research and I assume that many of you frequent posters here do ???

Thanks

These are the two documents that should answer your question about the timeline. The two sides are currently in the deposition and discovery phase. As you can see the judge wants this case at trial by February 17. At the scheduling conference no date was set but it could be either February or it may slip to April because of the amount of data USAPA has to pass over. But April at the latest. The judge is very concerned about the out of seniority furloughs and the damages done. That is the reason for the expedited schedule.

As to your other question. What if the Nicolau is found to be flawed? The Nicolau award is not on trial. The question of fairness or invalid data or any other issues are not relevant to the DFR. The validity of the Nicolau will have to be done by another court. The MDA or a different suit. That suit would have to be brought against the east negotiating committee or MEC. Because they were the ones that gave Nicolau the data. It was the east responsibly for the certifying those lists.

Go back and read the Nicolau award again. I believe that it may even have to go back to Nicolau. How happy do you think that he would be to see what the east has done to his award? First the that the east brought incorrect information. Second that the east has disregarded thier agreement.

8. The Board shall retain jurisdiction in accordance with Section H. 5 .b. of the ALPA Merger Policy to resolve any disputes over the meaning or interpretation of this Award. This retention of jurisdiction shall terminate when all provisions of the Award have been satisfied. In the event the Chairman becomes unavailable or unwilling to serve to resolve such disputes, the Merger Committees will agree on a replacement Chairman or will select one by the alternate strike method from the most recent ALPA list of seniority integrations.

The DFR suit will be over before any other law suit sees a court room. Before you get to excited about some magic bullet from the MDA suit being used by USAPA. USAPA’s entire defense is that the Nicolau award was an ALPA contrived list and therefore does not apply to USAPA. I doubt they are going to now go to court and suggest that because ALPA did it wrong that now applies to USAPA. Because USAPA would have to admit that the Nicolau list indeed binding on USAPA.


This is from the scheduling order:

DAMAGES; BIFURCATION OF TRIAL ON AMOUNT OF DAMAGES.
Trial on the claim for permanent injunction and liability for damages is accelerated and will be set no later than February 17, 2009. Trial on the amount of damages is bifurcated and will be scheduled, if necessary, after ruling on the trial on permanent injunction and liability for damages.
No dispositive motions will be allowed, as the parties have already engaged in extensive pre-trial motion practice and the urgency of the case does not permit time for another round of substantive motions before the claim for permanent injunction must be decided.

Scheduling conference:

This is the time set for hearing.

THE COURT ORDERS the above two cases consolidated under CV08-1633-PHX-NVW and all further documents should be filed with a dual caption and filed under CV08-1633-PHXNVW. Court and counsel confer regarding the status of the case.

THE COURT ORDERS Plaintiffs to file whatever motions for class certifications they wish by December 29, 2008 and that Defendants file a Response by January 16, 2009 and Plaintiffs file a Reply by January 23, 2009.

THE COURT ORDERS Defendants to file their brief on the jury trial issue by January 16, 2009, Plaintiffs’ Response is to be filed by January 23, 2009 and Defendant’s Reply, if any, to be filed by January 30, 2009.

THE COURT ORDERS Defendants to Respond to the Motion to Compel [doc. 106] by no later than January 29, 2009. Plaintiffs’ Reply is due in the time allotted by the Rules.

The pending Motion to Dismiss [doc. 16] in CV08-1728 is taken under advisement.

Time in Court: 1 hr, 45 mins.

 

[cleardirect]

If the award was declared invalid, I would most likely strip to the waist, roll inverted - and valsalva...... or some reasonable facsimile thereof to express my pleasure.

Why is that? According to the confident usapa, the Nicolau award is invalid already. That it was an ALPA list and therefore does not apply. USAPA and Seham have promised that it will never see the light of day.

So if you believe usapa what difference does it make if the Nicolau is found to be flawed?

Could it be that all the east pilots know deep down that final and binding really means final and binding? Do you not believe that usapa's word is good?

 

[nic4us]

If the award was declared invalid, I would most likely strip to the waist, roll inverted - and valsalva...... or some reasonable facsimile thereof to express my pleasure.

You would roll inverted and exhale against a closed airway to clear your ears? To each their own.

I see no reason the Nic would be declared invalid but if it were I suppose I would change my name to Bond4us, in recognition of senator Kit Bond of Missouri, who introduced the bill which guarantees a mediation arbitration process to seniority integration.

However, I am quite certain USAPA as the CBA would claim that they get to impose whatever they determine as fair, and we would be off to the lawsuit races once again.

Interesting question though,could go any of a wide variety of directions, depending on WHY the list was found to be invalid.

 

[Metroyet]

If the NIC award is flawed, the affected parties would have to set up their own legal defense and go after whomever the party was that was responsible for the error. I think we can agree that it wasn't the West pilots that handed Nic. the East seniority list. But, as was already pointed out, the nic award, in and of itself, is not at all relevant to the Litigation that is already well under way.

 

[kubotapilot]

Thanks 'Direct,

At least someone here is posting good data !
Your excerpt may also be interpreted as the Trial Date being set no later than 2/17. That is, the trial may be scheduled for later, say 9/17/09, but the date will be set by 2/17/09 ???

Also, it seems to me as impossible that discovery etc... would be complete by 2/17 for trial. If this case were rushed to that date, it would open up a huge channel for appeal would it not ?? I guess we can just agree to disagree regarding the eventual trial date for the DFR being way ahead of the MDA trial. If it happens that way more power to you.

I think all of the furloughs, especially the west ones before east new hires are illegal. Especially when we are about to factor in the 17 Large SJ overage flying hopefully about to go to arbitration.

In the end though, a MDA victory (maybe, as I don't believe ANYTHING with lawsuits are a slam-dunk) may create a chance to actually negotiate a fair seniority integration rather that the abominable mess that ALPA has left us. The EAST MEC should have started with a Wye river talk rather than all that BS saber rattling with DOH + no exceptions !

I am not linking the Nic and the DFR. I totally understand they are separate cases.

The MDA suit is against ALPA National and the East ALPA MEC, including appropriate EAST committees involved at the time the EAST list was submitted to arbitration. That is why I posted the hypothetical question regarding the NIC.

I think you are correct regarding the integration maybe going back to Nic or another arbitrator. I don't believe Nic or any of the outside parties have ANY EMOTIONAL ties to this process, as it is simply their JOBS.

Part of our problem as pilots is the fact that we have way too large egos and way too high emotional involvement to effectively negotiate anything. History has proven this time and again. The company has a hired gun for negotiations (Mr. Glass et al). Guys may complain and moan about his team but one thing is certain, they do EXACTLY what they were hired to do and they do an EXCELLENT job with NO emotional involvement.

 

[nycbusdriver]

As to your other question. What if the Nicolau is found to be flawed? The Nicolau award is not on trial.

If the NIC award is flawed, the affected parties would have to set up their own legal defense and go after whomever the party was that was responsible for the error. I think we can agree that it wasn't the West pilots that handed Nic. the East seniority list. But, as was already pointed out, the nic award, in and of itself, is not at all relevant to the Litigation that is already well under way.

I love it that the westies insist that USAPA is all about the Nicolau shame, but their lawsuit in Phoenix has nothing to do with it. Yeah, right.

The fact is that the Nicolau shame IS INDEED on trial, just not in Judge Wake's court. The "affected parties" have indeed set up their own legal defense and the Nicolau shame IS INDEED on trial in federal courtroom of Judge Gershon in Brooklyn, NY, in a suit brought by the former E170 pilots which were flown under the d/b/a MidAtlantic Airways portion of USAirways.

What would this conflict be called? "Dueling Judges?" "The Battle of the Federal District Courts?"

Anyone who thinks this will be settled by April, 2009, is deluding him/herself.

 

[Metroyet]

The fact is that the Nicolau shame IS INDEED on trial, just not in Judge Wake's court. The "affected parties" have indeed set up their own legal defense and the Nicolau shame IS INDEED on trial in federal courtroom of Judge Gershon in Brooklyn, NY, in a suit brought by the former E170 pilots which were flown under the d/b/a MidAtlantic Airways portion of USAirways.

What would this conflict be called? "Dueling Judges?" "The Battle of the Federal District Courts?"

Anyone who thinks this will be settled by April, 2009, is deluding him/herself.

Wow. Amazing how you're Smarter than both legal teams AND the Judge! USAPA is being sued for a failure in their Duty to Fairly Represent. That's it. That's the issue going to trial.

 

[kubotapilot]

Hi Metro,

I think the appropriate reply to you should be :

RTFP

Read The Freakin Post before you type.

You obviously did not as he stated correctly that the MDA case is also going to trial with a different Federal judge in Brooklyn. And he also correctly stated the MDA case amongst other issues is primarily concerned with the Nic Fiasco. So, there are ACTUALLY 2 (TWO) issues going to trial separately. The question is which one will go first. No matter what the sequence is, the MDA case, if successfully argued by the plaintiffs, will have a large impact.

Have a great day

Wow. Amazing how you're Smarter than both legal teams AND the Judge! USAPA is being sued for a failure in their Duty to Fairly Represent. That's it. That's the issue going to trial.

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Hi Metro,

I think the appropriate reply to you should be :

RTFP

Read The Freakin Post before you type.

You obviously did not as he stated correctly that the MDA case is also going to trial with a different Federal judge in Brooklyn. And he also correctly stated the MDA case amongst other issues is primarily concerned with the Nic Fiasco. So, there are ACTUALLY 2 (TWO) issues going to trial separately. The question is which one will go first. No matter what the sequence is, the MDA case, if successfully argued by the plaintiffs, will have a large impact.

Have a great day

I don't think you are looking through unbiased eyes here.

The MDA case and the DFR case are two completely separate issues. It is currently the east's fervent desire that they can somehow link the two.

But the MDA case is east vs east - period. It is a case to determine if the MDA pilots were fairly represented on the east list presented to Nicolau by the east merger committee. The west had no input in this and hence, has no dog in that hunt.

The DFR case is questioning the purpose, conduct, and intentions of usapa, and the genesis of same; and how all of this may or may not add up to fair representation of ALL pilots represented by usapa. In essence the DFR case is east vs west.

If Judge Wake finds the defendant at fault, he is empowered to impose whatever sanctions he feels appropriate. Certainly, the MDA case muddies the waters as to what the ultimate outcome will be from all of this, but it is far from being close to a significant issue in the present DFR case.

I think you should give the honorable judges more credit than you do - it's pretty easy to see right through the east's attempts to prolong the trial, dilute the outcome, and continue to "capture their attrition" ad infinitem.......

 

[Metroyet]

Hi Metro,

I think the appropriate reply to you should be :

RTFP

Read The Freakin Post before you type.

You obviously did not as he stated correctly that the MDA case is also going to trial with a different Federal judge in Brooklyn. And he also correctly stated the MDA case amongst other issues is primarily concerned with the Nic Fiasco. So, there are ACTUALLY 2 (TWO) issues going to trial separately. The question is which one will go first. No matter what the sequence is, the MDA case, if successfully argued by the plaintiffs, will have a large impact.

Have a great day

Yeah I get it. Crystal Clear. The operative words here are "Separate Issues". Judge Wake couldn't give a damn about what's going on in a Federal Court in Brooklyn. Apples and Oranges legally speaking. It will be up to *someone* to pursue a THIRD lawsuit seeking to whatever relief *they* think is appropriate if it is determined that the EAST PILOTS themselves turned in a fatally flawed list to Nic....hard to imagine that happening...but.


If the MDA case is Successful, how does USAPA deal with it? They were not even born when all this happened. What does it have to do with the current CBA? Nothing. Do you actually think the basic structure of the List would be changed? Do you really think another arbitrator would look at the flaw and then determine that DOH is now fair? What happened at NWA/DAL, (not that usapa will mention it)? This MDA thing might smoke out some shady behavior from some East Pilots but what is the ultimate point? Let me guess...DOH!!!!!



Read the Complaint.

 

[Crzipilot]

Hmmm..isn't the MDA case something along the lines of MDA was Mainline and not furloughed. Hence Weren't those 300/400 positions at MDA showed as furloughed on the list submitted to NIC? So if MDA wins, and part of the winning is the fact that they were active Mainline, then those 300 or so positions would need to be shown as active on the list given to NIC, which of course would change a bunch of things in that list?

 

[BoeingBoy]

So if MDA wins, and part of the winning is the fact that they were active Mainline, then those 300 or so positions would need to be shown as active on the list given to NIC, which of course would change a bunch of things in that list?

Assuming that Nic reworked the list after a victory by the MDA folks (he retains jurisdiction, after all), ~175 jobs would be added to the list. They would be the 170 captain jobs, slotted in either ahead of all the F/O jobs or ahead of the Group II (737 and A320) jobs depending on whether Nic used pay rate or seat to slot those 170 jobs on the list. The 170 F/O jobs would come behind all the west pilots just as the widebody jobs went ahead of all west pilots - West didn't fly anything as small as the 170 just like they didn't fly widebodies.

Since Nic slotted jobs then put names in those jobs, the result for pilots would be the top ~175 that were shown as furloughed being mixed in toward the bottom of the 737 and A320 F/O's part of the list and another ~175 being listed as active but behind everyone shown as active on the current Nic list (just changing status from furloughed to active).

Jim

 

[GorgeousGeorge]

Assuming that Nic reworked the list after a victory by the MDA folks (he retains jurisdiction, after all), ~175 jobs (and therefore pilots) would move on the list. They would be the 170 captain jobs, slotted in either ahead of all the F/O jobs or ahead of the Group II (737 and A320) jobs depending on whether Nic used pay rate or seat to slot those 170 jobs on the list. The 170 F/O jobs would come behind all the west pilots just as the widebody jobs went ahead of all west pilots - West didn't fly anything as small as the 170 just like they didn't fly widebodies.

Jim

There wouldn't be a reworking of the Nic list. An MDA win would throw fraud into the equation and invalidate the list and the ALPA process as it would be shown intentional perjurious evidence and testimony was provided in an attempt by ALPA to protect its interest in the DFR case it was defending against the MDA pilots.

 

[BoeingBoy]

There wouldn't be a reworking of the Nic list. An MDA win would throw fraud into the equation and invalidate the list and the ALPA process as it would be shown intentional perjurious evidence and testimony was provided in an attempt by ALPA to protect its interest in the DFR case it was defending against the MDA pilots.

Fraud in supplying an "incorrect" East list, I presume. Corrected by redoing the combined list using a "correct" East list with the MDA folks shown as active. The ALPA merger process itself has already been tested by lawsuits and found satisfactory, so I don't think the process contained in the ALPA C&BL's would be found fraudulent.

So we're back to what I described.

Jim