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

[lynyrdskynyrd]

You guys don't have Cochran, you have Seham.

 

[BoeingBoy]

What was the merger policy/process used (at that time)?

Basically the same as now, except with the addition of the words "preference for DOH but not to the exclusion of" the same goals that are in current policy.

I think that the PI/US merger was the last that went DOH, at least of the bigger airlines, but I may be forgetting one.

Jim

 

[tazz]

Thats correct...It should have been DOH from the start. Simple , Fare and unbiased.
The evidence is overwhelming with the frustrating events over the past few years.
We would not be in this situation today if it was DOH.

wopr

I wholeheartedly agree that if DOH was the methodology agreed to by both sides and used to merge the seniority lists from the beginning we would not be in this situation today. The west pilots, like the west flight attendants, would have accepted that and moved on.

Unlike the flight attendants, however, DOH was NOT the methodology used by the pilot's union. Alpa merger policy, which resulted in the Nicolau decision, was agreed to and used BY BOTH EAST AND WEST.

I know that you are plugging your ears and yelling "NAH NAH NAH" but that does not change the FACT that you agreed to, participated in the process, chose the arbitrator and preached to the west that arbitration was FINAL and BINDING.

 

[tazz]

Basically the same as now, except with the addition of the words "preference for DOH but not to the exclusion of" the same goals that are in current policy.

I think that the PI/US merger was the last that went DOH, at least of the bigger airlines, but I may be forgetting one.

Jim

As you stated, EXCEPT for those words. I don't know exactly when, but I believe it was subsequent to that merger that policy changed, to what it is today - with the cooperation of US Airways.

 

[Piedmont1984]

You guys don't have Cochran, you have Seham.

Ouch.

 

[nic4us]

A320 Driver,
Oooh...me thinks they are scared of having Sully and Skiles on the stand. I heard they are going. Skiles is the poster boy for how negatively the Nicolau list will affect a career. Sully started with PSA, he can testify how his PSA seniority was handled -- DOH. In essence, flight 1549 is an excellent example of how WELL a crew that started at former airlines worked together -- Allegheny, Piedmont, PSA, and USAir. What do they all have in common? Date of hire, that's how you do mergers.

Later,
Eye

Scared of Sully, not me. I hope they come. Any testimony they might offer will help the West.

Skiles is not only the poster boy for how negatively his career was affected prior to the merger, but also a prime example of a group willing to disregard a contract because "they" feel it is not "fair".

So, again, I hope they come. I would attempt to attend that day for certain.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

You guys don't have Cochran, you have Seham.

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

 

[Pacemaker]

I heard Wolf & Gangwal are also attending the upcoming Seniority Integration Trial.

They're going to testify that usair had "No Plan B" since 2001.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

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

And in the latest breaking news, Chevy Chase confirmed that Cochran is still dead. My point was you have a bush league lawyer, not that it matters because you're barking up the wrong tree anyway.

 

[dgriffit]

1) I very much disagree with not fully respecting length of service, and, as I've many times stated; I feel that furloughs/etc should be done with what any individual's contributed as the benchmark. I'd be fine with a list based on LOS myself. I've a question though = Since when did anyone out west fret themselves at all over LOS?

In my opinion, LOS is not an accurate representation of seniority either. I believe that being furloughed, is "making the ultimate sacrifice" for the health of the company so that you guys (both sides included here) can even be working here to have this discussion. I feel it is a total disrespect to not place a value on being furloughed.

 

[Piedmont1984]

In my opinion, LOS is not an accurate representation of seniority either. I believe that being furloughed, is "making the ultimate sacrifice" for the health of the company so that you guys (both sides included here) can even be working here to have this discussion. I feel it is a total disrespect to not place a value on being furloughed.

Tough issue, but I don't think you can argue that someone who had a job should go while someone furloughed should return.

Were that the case in a merger with, say Virgin America, all their pilots would go so our furloughees could return. Just wouldn't float.

Compensate furloughees in other ways I would say.

 

[toganoflex]

Thats correct...It should have been DOH from the start. Simple , Fare and unbiased.
The evidence is overwhelming with the frustrating events over the past few years.
We would not be in this situation today if it was DOH.
More pilots except the concept than any other. Its the entitlement give me give me now daddy mentality that has put us where we are.

As I will clarify again that if the AW group had been more senior to me ,they would have gone above me. Thats the way it is. Thats the way I accept it and I will get mine as attrition occurs.

Simple Fare and unbiased

wopr

And keep dreaming because that's all its going to be - a dream,

 

[A320 Driver]

Are you people really that dense? Your hopes for an emotional appeal to the jury will NEVER be heard! This is contract law. The fairness of the Nic is NOT what is on trial here, a breach of contract is. As soon as the ambulance chaser Seman tries to introduce Sully or anyone else who wants to boo hoo to the jury, an objection will be made because it is irrelivent and it will be sustained by WAKE!

"This jury trial will only address the liability facts underlying
Plaintiffs’ class action. An additional bench trial will adjudicate any injunction-specific
facts shortly thereafter, and any monetary relief owing to the named plaintiffs and/or the
class could be dealt with in subsequent proceedings"

The above meaning, "it is NOT about the "fairness or unfairness" of the NIC"

This case is going to be easy to prove and here is why...This is from the most recent order from the Judge with regard to any further delay...

"Counsel for USAPA admits that
the parties have in place a factual stipulation that is “pretty comprehensive.â€￾ (Doc.
# 211, at 38.) USAPA points to no affirmative defense subjecting it to a significant
burden of proof; its main defenses have already been rejected at the dismissal stage. "

Other than falling on your knee's and crying for mercy to the jury, can any of you usapa cheerleaders give one example of any kind of defense to a breach of contract since even the Judge says you don't have one?

Oh, and it will be the crook Seman defending the case. The back up team that was brought in from Philly has a more pressing 28 million dollar case to chase so NO DELAY for the usapa lawyers....Again from the Judge...

"Mr. Brengle, USAPA’s trial counsel who was admitted pro hac vice in January
2009, attests that his work schedule will not permit him to conduct a trial in April, but the
convenience of counsel cannot outweigh the needs of the litigants and the Court’s trial
calendar."

AND if any of you would take the time to visit the uscapa website and actually read any of these court orders or any other legal history of this case, this from the judge, should send a chill down your spine...

"From the beginning, the Court has advised the parties of the great time urgency in
this matter. It holds profound importance for all parties concerned. USAPA has an
interest in removing the cloud of doubt surrounding its bargaining position. The Plaintiffs
and the class members have an interest in the adjudication of their complaints and injuries
arising out of the union’s alleged wrongs. And this four-year-old dispute within the union
obstructs the operations of a major airline in a troubled economy. As much as the
circumstances of this case make it the Court’s responsibility to effect a speedy resolution,
an expedited discovery schedule is both feasible and appropriate."

You don't think the Judge knows what usapa has done and is attempting to do? You are sadly mistaken. This is a Federal Judge and it's not his first day on the job. If and WHEN the West pilots prevail, I expect some SERIOUS orders from him that can and will force an end to this sham called the usapa "experiment."

Boy, you guys got it all sewed up! With Judge Wake in your corner, you can't lose. I mean, he's already decided the case if I read you right. What do we need a jury for? They can't hear any testimony to the fairness of the Nic according to you, so what are they there for anyway? Contract law? MMM, lets see, how about this...

• 
  *New union is voted in fair and square with the Feds watching.
  *West refuses to participate and actually come up with a couple of Alter Ego unions of their own.
  *West refuses to be part of the process, pay dues, and rebuff all efforts to get them onboard.
  *West files suit for DFR???
  
  I can't wait to get this in front of a jury. Should be interesting to say the least.
  
  A320 Driver B)

 

[N1bugmeupflaps1]

And keep dreaming because that's all its going to be - a dream,

Here's my take on this issue as a new reader.

It's really plain to see who is on what side of the issue by the posts. I read Toganoflex, Tazz, Clearedirect, Nicelandingcpatain, and Tiger 1050 as the most prolific posters' who are obviously HP pilots. And EastUS, NYC, Nostradamoas, Snoopdog, and a few others from the AAA side.

The last post by Toganoflex I think accurately summarizes the case: in that the West would rather gamble and win, than participate in an industry-accepted policy that used to be in place. By that I mean, as ALPA negotiations broke down (big surprise there) a roll of the dice will suffice regarding a merger policy for them. To heck with the next guy who merges? You won this one, and that good enough for you?....what about the industry as a whole? I see you don't care about a policy....a "roll of the dice will suffice".
I think it's amatuerish, wrong, greedy, and an opportunistic way to go through your "trade" as a union employee.
Good luck in the future, we are all watching this, and we didn't all sign up to "gamble" our hard-earned careers' away as you seem so comfortable to do.

It won't fly with us, I'll tell you that. We need a policy, period.

(UAL B-767 Captain)

 

[Waketurbulence]

• 
  *New union is voted in fair and square with the Feds watching.
  *West refuses to participate and actually come up with a couple of Alter Ego unions of their own.
  *West refuses to be part of the process, pay dues, and rebuff all efforts to get them onboard.
  *West files suit for DFR???
  
  I can't wait to get this in front of a jury. Should be interesting to say the least.
  
  A320 Driver B)

• 
  
  ALL irrelavant as this is about a breach of contract!!!
  
  How bout' this...
  
  Two groups of pilots belong to the same union.
  
  Both groups negotiate a Transition Agreement (contract) which includes a section on how seniority will be determined. (ALPA merger policy)
  
  Said union's policy outlines the process that will be followed to achive the combined seniority list. (Negotiation, Mediation, Arbitration)
  
  Both groups agree (in writing) to follow said policy up to and including binding arbitration.
  
  One group is not happy with the outcome of said arbitration.
  
  Same group sets off to overturn and/or ignore the mutually agreed to ruling by protesting, withdrawing from negotiations, then using their greater numbers, decertifing the current union and forming a new "union" in order to circumvent the ruling.
  
  Creating a doh seniority list without ANY input from the West pilot group and then passing to the company in another attempt ignore it's responsibility to honor an agreement that it is legally bound to honor.
  
  Hence, the Duty to Fairly Represent
  
  There are piles of paper and video evidence that will prove these FACTS.
  
  I ask again, what is uspata's defense going to be? Whine that it's "not fair"???
  
  I can't wait for it to get to a jury either.
  
  Your right about one thing though, it should be interesting.