US Pilots Labor Thread 3/11-3/18 OBSERVE THE RULES

[fodase]

Don't forget, Did the east side have active pilots who were listed as furloughed? Did ALPA provide an inaccurate list to Mr. Nick? All very important.

Yeah, you didn't have to be furloughed to go to mda, and mda counted for your longevity. BTW how's that mda suit coming? lol.

 

[cleardirect]

Well, your circuitous arguing is really getting you somewhere now, isn't it?

1) What was the purpose of west pilot's sending in membership applications?
- to become members....right? what other reason would one do this.

Yes! And?

2) (Your sidestep of the real issue is noted), you braggingly suggest that even though west pilots
submitted applications, they shouldn't have been made members. Well, that wouldn't be fair
fair to them, would it? You stacked the deck, USAPA trumped you, and you're mad...

Unfair to the west. I agree there. “Stacked the deckâ€￾ Just exactly how did the west do that? USAPA (the east) wrote the C&BL without input from the west. USAPA was elected by the east. The west can only deal with the C&BL as written. So how did our minority manage to stack anything? By trumped do you mean made up?

3) We all know just how upset you are that USAPA finally pinned you down from 2 years of
evasive tactics to kill off USAPA and never join...time to live with it. If you NEVER join, few
care, your choice. But for those that mailed in applications, USAPA checkmated the game
you were playing.

2 years? April 2008 to March 16, 2009. Need a calculator? USAPA (the east) changed the C&BL in November so the BPR could at that time legally vote in west members. Not before. Checkmated? Again April 1st a third party neutral will hear the facts he will decide.

4) All this charade has really shown is just how slippery and pre-meditated the west pilots
have been over their "persecution" by USAPA and the East.

Oh we are wasskely wabbits aren’t we.

None of it has a peep to do with what you deem to be your hail-mary DFR case. But it is revealing of west behavior and intent.

For that, thanks.

Well in mid May we will find out just who threw up a hail Mary. Something to remember. Per federal law associations have a duty to fairly represent all members of the class. Members of that class have no duty at all to do anything. So as you seem so interested. Our “behavior or intentâ€￾ is irrelevant to this situation. Join don’t join, member non member, objector whatever. It means nothing. USAPA has the legal duty to represent and to follow their own C&BL’s. Even if (big if) USAPA had the best intentions in going off book to vote in west members. It was against the C&BL’s. Good intent, bad intent. Does not matter, what do the rules say?

 

[Mr. Big]

Yes! And?



Unfair to the west. I agree there. “Stacked the deckâ€￾ Just exactly how did the west do that? USAPA (the east) wrote the C&BL without input from the west. USAPA was elected by the east. The west can only deal with the C&BL as written. So how did our minority manage to stack anything? By trumped do you mean made up?


It was against the C&BL’s. Good intent, bad intent. Does not matter, what do the rules say?

`Are you needing me to explain your tactics to you now?...Are we playing the innocent and abiding by the CBL's card now? Sure you wanna go there?

Speaking of "all we can do is abide by the CBL's..." then why all the red-ink markers crossing out the DOH language in your applications regarding the very CBL's you are attempting to now rigorously defend? Or did you forget already?

You see, the west has wiggled around so many times that it does begin to get hard to keep it all congruent, now doesn't it?

See ya in court, Perry Mason

PS...trumped, as in: the final play, cornering the ever-elusive west
"sprinters" running and hiding from AH...and running and hiding from USAPA.

And I suggest you file a lawsuit against USAPA for it's BPR acting on behalf of member applicants who desired membership...that'll be great:

"Your honor, I'm here suing USAPA for taking measures to vote on my membership application...they did it wrong..."

"But you DID apply for membership, yes?"

"yes, but..."

"Did they make you a member as your were applying for?..."


Uh...yes?...but....I didn't really want to be a member...I was supposed to be able to hide in Susie's closet....

"Were you harmed in some way by this action?"

"Uh..."

Next.

 

[Tiger 1050]

I think this is too funny. You guys think this is about the dispositions of membership applications....

Read Judge Wake's orders. All of them. You'll find clarity.

 

[Mr. Big]

I think this is too funny. You guys think this is about the dispositions of membership applications....

Read Judge Wake's orders. All of them. You'll find clarity.

What? do you think I'm new?...I know exactly what the issue is...I'm just making sure cleardirect gets a hip-check when needed to keep him honest. He's talking CBL's...and I'm giving him a prayer-meeting.

PS: just because Brice is in PHX doesn't provide for your membership activities now....

the amended CBL's make CLT your domicile reps if Brice resigns...you get voted on in any event.

run, Forrest, run.....just remember there's no Susie.


As to the rest of it...it is what it is, nobody is losing too much sleep out here.

 

[usabusdriver]

Good thing. Cochran has been DEAD since 2005. What are you guys going to do for evidence? Hold a picture of a BMW up saying you could have bought it with your upgrade money? Oh, or a photo of your old lady's saggy ta-tas and how the raise will get those ta-tas more user friendly?

🙄

Later,
Eye

Eye,

I am sorry but the rules of evidence in the court will not allow a photo. Only live breastimony will be permitted, and opposing counsel must be provided the opportunity to test how user friendly they actually are.

 

[tazz]

Don't forget, Did the east side have active pilots who were listed as furloughed? Did ALPA provide an inaccurate list to Mr. Nick? All very important.

No, they did not.

 

[tazz]

What? do you think I'm new?...I know exactly what the issue is...

It's obvious from your posts that you really don't.

 

[Freighterguynow]

it is not fair to expect the West pilot group to have to pay the price (D.O.H) for all of the shrinkage and previous failures of US Airways.

How the Crash Will Reshape America

Cities in the Sand: The End of Easy Expansion

For a generation or more, no swath of the United States has grown more madly than the Sun Belt. Of course, the area we call the “Sun Belt†is vast, and the term is something of a catch-all: the cities and metropolitan areas within it have grown for disparate reasons. Los Angeles is a mecca for media and entertainment; San Jose and Austin developed significant, innovative high-tech industries; Houston became a hub for energy production; Nashville developed a unique niche in low-cost music recording and production; Charlotte emerged as a center for cost-effective banking and low-end finance.

But in the heady days of the housing bubble, some Sun Belt cities—Phoenix and Las Vegas are the best examples—developed economies centered largely on real estate and construction. With sunny weather and plenty of flat, empty land, they got caught in a classic boom cycle. Although these places drew tourists, retirees, and some industry—firms seeking bigger footprints at lower costs—much of the cities’ development came from, well, development itself. At a minimum, these places will take a long, long time to regain the ground they’ve recently lost in local wealth and housing values. It’s not unthinkable that some of them could be in for an extended period of further decline.

To an uncommon degree, the economic boom in these cities was propelled by housing appreciation: as prices rose, more people moved in, seeking inexpensive lifestyles and the opportunity to get in on the real-estate market where it was rising, but still affordable. Local homeowners pumped more and more capital out of their houses as well, taking out home-equity loans and injecting money into the local economy in the form of home improvements and demand for retail goods and low-level services. Cities grew, tax coffers filled, spending continued, more people arrived. Yet the boom itself neither followed nor resulted in the development of sustainable, scalable, highly productive industries or services. It was fueled and funded by housing, and housing was its primary product. Whole cities and metro regions became giant Ponzi schemes.

Phoenix, for instance, grew from 983,403 people in 1990 to 1,552,259 in 2007. One of its suburbs, Mesa, now has nearly half a million residents, more than Pittsburgh, Cleveland, or Miami. As housing starts and housing prices rose, so did tax revenues, and a major capital-spending boom occurred throughout the Greater Phoenix area. Arizona State University built a new downtown Phoenix campus, and the city expanded its convention center and constructed a 20-mile light-rail system connecting Phoenix, Mesa, and Tempe.

And then the bubble burst. From October 2007 through October 2008, the Phoenix area registered the largest decline in housing values in the country: 32.7 percent. (Las Vegas was just a whisker behind, at 31.7 percent. Housing in the New York region, by contrast, fell by just 7.5 percent over the same period.) Overstretched and overbuilt, the region is now experiencing a fiscal double whammy, as its many retirees—some 21 percent of its residents are older than 55—have seen their retirement savings decimated. Mortgages Limited, the state’s largest private commercial lender, filed for bankruptcy last summer. The city is running a $200 million budget deficit, which is only expected to grow. Last fall, the city government petitioned for federal funds to help it deal with the financial crisis. “We had a big bubble here, and it burst,†Anthony Sanders, a professor of economics and finance at ASU, told USA Today in December. “We’ve taken Kevin Costner’s Field of Dreams and now it’s Field of Screams. If you build it, nobody comes.â€

Will people wash out of these places as fast as they washed in, leaving empty sprawl and all the ills that accompany it? Will these cities gradually attract more businesses and industries, allowing them to build more-diverse and more-resilient economies? Or will they subsist on tourism—which may be meager for quite some time—and on the Social Security checks of their retirees? No matter what, their character and atmosphere are likely to change radically.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903/meltdown-geography

 

[Metroyet]

It's obvious from your posts that you really don't.

When all is lost...change the argument.

Watch Seham make that concept the foundation of his case next month.

 

[Pacemaker]

Freighterguynow,

The article you cite is relevant to the period from 2006-2009 and certainly doesn't bode well for US Airways markets in CLT, FL, or PHX.

It was your airlines' management that destroyed your careers by deciding, in the mid-late 80's, to bet the farm on little airplanes, domestic short-haul regional flying, and a hub in PIT.

That covers the period of career implosion from 1990-2005 which is the period germane to the method of seniority integration.

 

[luvn737s]

Folks overpaid for houses in PHX and LAS, so the drop was precipitous. Nobody ever wanted to live in NY State so property values never climbed in the first place.

Toxic mortgages=stupid buyers

 

[nic4us]

You are mixing what is a reasonable calculation argument (although I disagree with it) with speculation. Unless you had the ability to see into the future, you have no way to know the likelihood of recall... period. You are making an assumption that AWA saved US and saved the jobs of the furloughees. It may have, or it may have been vice versa, or who is to say what would have happened had there not been a merger? We have no crystal ball. Just speculation.

One other comment. Has the west not adopted DOH for their scheduling, base bid, vacation, etc? It seems as though most members feel it works pretty well for their day to day work.

You are correct . I should have said recalled as a result of the merger, not, no likely recall without the merger.

The West seniority is of course based on hire date. Within that hire date it is by Date of birth. If we used that methodology to combine our groups it would have gone Date of birth on the day of the merger.

 

[fodase]

TIC...TOC...TIC...TOC.......
As usual, all three orders are well worth the time to read. It should be clear to anyone by now that we are going to trial April 28th, and no delay tactics are going to stop that from happening.

The first order we'll discuss is USAPA's motion to have the Court allow them to submit a request for Summary Judgment - SJ for short. You can read this order here
(in case your browser does not link properly, try this link: http://www.cactuspilot.org/Order_Denial_Mo...Js_16MAR09.pdf)

SJ is a mechanism whereby a judge can decide a case after all of the evidence gathering is completed. If there aren't any disputed issues of fact, and if the law is clear as to who is right, then the party can ask the court to make the final decision "as a matter of law," because the law is so clear that the non-moving party is not entitled to a judgment. Hence, there's no case. In our case, and contrary to what USAPA and Seham have been saying all along, the law is not clear:

"Contrary to USAPA’s contention, this question does not appear to be resolvable as a matter of law by looking at the purported ability of the East Pilot majority, prior to the formation of USAPA, to hold other negotiations hostage until the Nicolau Award was undone. The Nicolau Award may have created such a “logjamâ€￾ prior to the formation of USAPA, but it is still likely possible to infer that USAPA did not break any such logjam in the interest of all US Airways pilots. This question and others like it will require evidence. Summary judgment is not a likely vehicle for their resolution."

We firmly believe that when the facts are all layed out before the jury, the USAPA "just let us throw the West pilots under the bus because then we will break the proverbial log jam and everyone will be better off" argument will be . . . shall we say. . . incriminating. In their Motion for Summary Judgment, USAPA also brought up the ripeness issue. Why, we have no idea as Judge Wake has explained more than once why ripeness will not bar our claim. Does USAPA not read any of the Court's orders? A quick note about ripeness: before a federal court can hear a claim, several prerequisites must be met. One is the concept of ripeness, which means that the controversy at issue must have immediate and identifiable harms, not prospective or possible harms. USAPA continues to maintain that the DOH list with (illusory) C&Rs does not represent a concrete harm to the West, and hence our claim that USAPA has breached its DFR is not ripe. And having to repeat himself - again - Judge Wake plainly says that ripeness is not a bar to our claim.

 

[hp_fa]

Can you link the other two?