US Pilots Labor Thread 3/4-3/11-READ THE FIRST POST

[Waketurbulence]

So; We're dealing with the purely hypothetical at this point? As to your earlier = Kindly stop with all the supposedly disenfranchised "victimized" whining. You folks out there have not only been continuously encouraged to get involved, make your concerns known, and VOTE from day one forward to the present, but, have instead, most adamantly and actively refused to do so. That you've, as a group, completely refused to participate in any of this isn't reasonably of the least concern to myself and most others out east.

I say "may" because I don't know and it appears, neither do you.

What information was available to you in order to make an informed decision?

Can you post ANY info that usapa offered to the membership that discusses the pros and cons of this vote or did you just follow their recommendation to vote "for" it?

PS Even if I did vote, it would have been against because we got NOTHING in return. It was a give away, plain and simple.

 

[luvn737s]

And why, when the issue was brought to their attention, did they steadfastly refuse to alter their course and at least acknowledge the opposing opinion?

Has tunnel vision ever been a winning strategy? Do the east pilots think this is the best we can do?

 

[A320 Driver]

I say "may" because I don't know and it appears, neither do you.

What information was available to you in order to make an informed decision?

Can you post ANY info that usapa offered to the membership that discusses the pros and cons of this vote or did you just follow their recommendation to vote "for" it?

PS Even if I did vote, it would have been against because we got NOTHING in return. It was a give away, plain and simple.

I just vote "NO" to everything... LOL. They don't bother to explain the issue on the ballot. It refers to an explaination on the USAPA website. I don't want to try to ferret it out, so...NO. More than an equal number vote YES because the BPR said to. They did the same thing with the Constitution and Bylaw changes when they brought back the roll call vote in all it's former glory and eliminated the requirement to hold their meetings at layover hotels. These new boys ( the few there are) are learning how to feast at the FPL trough like their former ALPA breathren.



A320 Driver B)

 

[Megasnoop]

If they had achieved that trade-off, indeed if the NAC/BPR had achieved anything in return rather than just rolling over like an obedient puppy, you wouldn't hear us complaining.

Electric Jet, et al. The BPR really didnt have much of a choice.

Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act.

SEC. 2. AGE STANDARDS FOR PILOTS.

(f) AMENDMENTS TO LABOR AGREEMENTS AND BENEFIT
PLANS. Any amendment to a labor agreement or benefit plan
of an air carrier that is required to conform with the requirements
of this section or a regulation issued to carry out this section,
and is applicable to pilots represented for collective bargaining,
shall be made by agreement of the air carrier and the designated
bargaining representative of the pilots of the air carrier.

Are you now suggesting that the NAC/BPR was required to make the change to conform with the requirements of that section? I'm sure you have access to the entire act; would you be so kind as to highlight precisely where the age 58 limitation was in violation of the act?

Yes, they were. They had no choice. But just to set the record straight on why USAPA had to take the action it did, heres what happened.

The law changed to age 65. That meant all age-related provisions SHALL be adjusted. The law required it. That included the age 58 rule.

But this change to Wests Section 24 had nothing to do with an FO not being allowed to upgrade. It happened because of a protest in the downgrade bid by more than one 58+ West CAPTAIN. This is what went down: The CAs were lineholders on the 757 and 737. With the downgrade bid, they were forced on reserve on their current equipment, making less money and not being allowed to bid their seniority. They demanded the right to bid on the A320 where they could still hold lines and make more money. Since all West equipment paid the same, going from line holder to reserve screwed these guys and violated their seniority.

The company realized the CAs had a slam-dunk age-discrimination case, based on the age 65 law. Both the company and the union had to comply.

This had NOTHING to do with FOs hanging out in the right seat and enjoying CA pay. So dont make it into something that didnt even come up in the bid.

snoop-scoops-the-truth

 

[toganoflex]

Latest from AoL. For those east pilots that can't read, have someone from USAPA read it to you.


A trial is where a defendant’s actions are proven before a jury, and the guilt, or non-guilt of those acts is measured against the law. Our case is about discrimination. Despite the objective fairness of the Nicolau decision, that will not be litigated as it has nothing to do with the central issue of discrimination. All of the whining and attempts to revise history by the East will not change the fact that the arbitration is long over. To be clear, the East should not construe this as any sort of tacit admission that we at Leonidas deep down believe that Nicolau is somehow unfair. Hardly. If anything, the great weight of evidence suggests that Nicolau was more than generous in dealing with the East and if any East pilot doubts this, then they should climb out of their hole and read the recent three-arbitrator opinion from the Delta-Northwest seniority integration. The fairness of Nicolau is not at issue and it will have no bearing on our DFR trial which will commence in 44 days.

What is at issue is whether a union breaches its duty of fair representation under the facts of this case: (i) two labor groups participate in a binding arbitration; (ii) and the larger of the two groups then decides they are dissatisfied with the arbitrated result (because it did not comport with their unrealistic position); (iii) it then uses its obvious numerical advantage to change unions, repudiate the arbitration, and formulate a new seniority list, which; (iv) harms or disadvantages every member of the minority while advancing every member of the majority; and (v) the union unequivocally asserts its plan to incorporate this new list into a contract using its majority to overpower the minority without consideration of the smaller group. This is not a question for us or USAPA to answer. Rather, it will be up to a jury of working Americans to decide. They will analyze the facts of our case through the prism of discrimination, and decide as they see fit. We are confident in the merits of our position as the West has never acted in any way other than to do what is right and what is fair. Take comfort, because in the vast majority of cases, juries do get it right. We believe that this case will be no different, and that is exactly why going to trial for USAPA and their counsel is “unthinkable.â€

The jury will receive the case on or before May 8th, 2009, which is the scheduled completion date of the trial. Judging from the actions of USAPA’s counsel and considering USAPA's virtual silence, one cannot help but think that USAPA is terrified to go to trial. Their apparent panic over the mere scheduling of a trial is quite interesting, as it leads one to question whether USAPA was convinced by their attorney that this would not occur for years. Why else would USAPA be so desperately trying to avoid going to trial - as evidenced by their nonstop, assembly line production of meaningless filings - if it did not somehow conflict with what was promised? USAPA should have known last November when Judge Wake issued his order finding that he had jurisdiction to hear this case that a trial would occur. The only disconnect we can think of is that USAPA was completely sold on an idea that was too good to be true: Get your own mob-derived seniority list crammed down the throats of the West, tie the DFR case up in court for years and then run into retirement. Even better, what recovery the West might eventually obtain would then be from a union in which the plaintiffs had become the majority. The West would essentially be recovering damages from themselves. No doubt it must have sounded like one heck of a plan when hatched, so long as one completely divorced himself or herself from reality.

What is really of interest to us in the West is how USAPA will break this unpleasant news to its fanatical supporters. The second firewall has been breached; the first was the motion to dismiss and now it was the scheduling of the trial. We admit that this is pure conjecture on our part, but we feel confident that we are right. All one has to do is piece together USAPA's responses this past week and that of their hysterical attorney and it all points to the inescapable fact that to them, A TRIAL WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. Well, it is. And the reason is that in America there are limits to what one group can do to another. Or to put it another way, a “wide range of reasonableness†is not synonymous with a blank check to trounce upon anyone.

Most West pilots have known this all along but the point we wish to underscore to the West readers is that injustice, by itself, does not get one before a judge. We are heading for trial mainly because of two reasons: (1) the early financial support by a handful of West pilots; and (2) the good fortune of having a talented legal team including Mr. Marty Harper, Dr. Andy Jacob, Mr. Don Stevens, Ms. Kelly Flood, and Ms. Katie Brown take on our case for all. Now that we are off the ground, we are flying pretty high and that is because of the amazing support from our fellow West pilots. So much has occurred since USAPA began their quest to destroy the careers of every West pilot, and we as a group owe a debt of gratitude to the legal counsel that has so far stopped USAPA cold.

The founding leadership of USAPA has operated in a way that has pushed all US Airways pilots into a “winner takes all†contest. Interestingly, we stand to lose everything and forfeit that which we are owed, yet the opposite is true for USAPA and their angry followers. Think about that for a moment: We in the West have little to gain except for the realization of an arbitrated award. On the other hand, USAPA, its founders and supporters really have nothing to lose if we prevail, other than misplaced “pride,†wasted time, and LOTS of wasted income. This is the reality of our opponent. They have a proven, mind-blowing sense of entitlement. They cared not to fight for its losses in the past, but suddenly felt the urgency to win at all costs against the West pilots. They thought nothing of characterizing one of the most respected arbitrators in the world as being "senile" merely because he would not facilitate their theft of every West pilot’s career. When they couldn’t quite capitalize enough on their leverage within ALPA National to force us to capitulate, they thought nothing of embarking upon their own ambitious plan to simply take that which does not belong to them. Aided by a lawyer who all but guaranteed the impossible, USAPA sold its promises on the foundation that the law will turn a blind eye to whatever is done to the West pilots-fairness be [d a r n]ed because fairness can be defined by a mob. Sorry, but that's not the way it works in America today. We believe that is a totally improper characterization of what the law will allow. The good news (we believe) is that a jury will agree.
Although the setting of a trial date may appear to many West pilots as the light at the end of the tunnel, we must point out that there is much work to be done between now and April 28th. It would be inane to believe that we can merely coast to victory as the opposition is already swinging into full crisis mode. Everything is now at stake for the founders of USAPA, their angry followers, and especially for their legal counsel. We have already witnessed a constant parade of antics and legal tactics which shock the conscience. The vast majority of union members in America would bristle at the thought of a union using union dues money to attack individual union members through malevolent and frivolous lawsuits. But, this is precisely what the self-appointed leadership of USAPA embarked upon within days of becoming the bargaining agent. This event should have cued anyone on the East who cared that the pilots running the new pilot union are not normal. Unfortunately for all of us, East and West, these same individuals continue unchecked. They have already advertised their willingness to sell everything to Parker in exchange for their DOH (minus Trump Shuttle and Empire) seniority list. Their mocking use of off duty police officers at West road shows illustrates their deep contempt for all West pilots. But, nothing compares to their open willingness to sell every bit of unionism down the river in order to cut a deal with Parker just to get “their†“seniority†list incorporated into a contract. Now, think about the type of people who would do this, and consider whether they will suddenly change their tune and begin to participate in good faith in the remainder of the pre-trial process and during the trial itself. Please consider what our attorneys (and all of us, for that matter) are dealing with, and think about how much raw talent, fortitude, and moral authority it must have taken on their part just to get us to this point.

The bottom line is that we are going to trial, and yes, we believe the West has a compelling case. There are, however, no guarantees in life, or in arbitration, or in court. All we can do now is to stay focused on the task at hand as a lot of work remains to be done. Expect delay tactics all the way through April 28th. True to form, Seham has already appealed (or is threatening to appeal) the judge’s decision to certify the West as a Class. It also appears that he believes an April 28th trial date is prejudicial to his client, as it is not enough time to properly prepare for trial. Never mind that this trial was originally supposed to commence February 17th. Never mind that it was Seham alone who has asked for extensions in filing responses, and never mind that Seham is seeking to depose just about any West pilot who has ever had anything to do with ALPA including those who have no association with Leonidas or the Plaintiffs. And the East all thought that this was to be a “slam dunk,†for USAPA. Why then the reluctance? To the East pilots who still subscribe to USAPA's date-of-hire cram down, we ask the following rhetorical question: “If USAPA’s position was so fair and so sound, then what justifies USAPA’s attempt to avoid litigating on the merits?â€

We will be making arrangements with the court to accommodate the maximum number of US Airways pilots (East and West), as we anticipate that many of you are eager to be “ringside†at the trial. Make no mistake about it, the two weeks of April 28th through May 8th will probably be the most significant during any West pilot’s professional career. In the event of a guilty verdict, the jury will be thanked for their service by Judge Wake and then dismissed. The remedy/damages phase will then begin. This phase will be bifurcated into two components: equitable and legal. Since we need to get beyond the liability question [is USAPA guilty?] before getting to damages and remedies, we will not discuss either damages or remedies until the time is right. Our focus now is on what we must do to slam this case shut. Suffice it to say, a union’s liability for breach of its duty of fair representation opens the door to a number of remedies, in both equity and law.

 

[Elevation]

Electric Jet, et al. The BPR really didnt have much of a choice.


They had no choice. But just to set the record straight on why USAPA had to take the action it did, heres what happened.

The law changed to age 65. That meant all age-related provisions SHALL be adjusted. The law required it. That included the age 58 rule.

If they had no choice and it was the law why did you put it up for a vote? What if it got voted down?

 

[EastUS]

Latest from AoL. For those east pilots that can't read, have someone from USAPA read it to you.


In the event of a guilty verdict,

For those precious few that can read, (thanks for being so generous of spirit as to assume some can) and who are less enamoured of trite and meaningless propoganda; only the above line's of any actual value. = "In the event...."

"The two weeks..will probably be the most significant during any west pilot's professional career"....Ummm...I'd have to add that I feel the deepest and fullest, legitimate sympathy for anyone who's aviation career's "most significant" "two weeks" involved merely playing spectator at some trial.....

Snooze alarm resst.

 

[sharktooth]

But it's USAPA and someone else's contract so it's only a differing opinion.

I don't think you can compare ALPA with USAPA in this instance. There would have been ALPA representatives from the west who could have spoken and expressed their concerns with such a change.

Under USAPA, in a deliberate manner, no qualified person presented themselves as representatives for the "west" contract. Had they done so, concerns and other points of view would have resulted in a different outcome.

This is not a "provocatively dressed equals rape justification", at all. It is a learning process the east has already suffered from, a lack of participation by pilots for many years. If you cannot get yourself to a union meeting (tax deductible) or somehow project your concerns to your representatives or if you have no representatives in a misguided attempt to "protest", then you will bear the consequences of such, a truly conservative taking of personal responsibility.

I believe "due diligence", to be set by a court I suppose, was properly executed by USAPA. I don't like the outcome either, but, rather than slinging mud, would tend to blame the misguided protest of USAPA, first.

Thanks, AWAPPA.

 

[Megasnoop]

If they had no choice and it was the law why did you put it up for a vote? What if it got voted down?

Dotting all the Is, crossing all the Ts. The ultimate bid that allowed those 58+ CAs to bid their seniority had to match the contract or someone who didnt like the result would protest. Now you guys are going to file a complaint? You got to be kidding. Anyway, the Age 65 law required a change in the contract.

If it got voted down? I guess wed be sorting through an EEOC complaint.

Note to Jimbo: there was no leverage.

Snooper, at your service

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

For those precious few that can read, (thanks for being so generous of spirit as to assume some can) and who are less enamoured of trite and meaningless propoganda; only the above line's of any actual value. = "In the event...."

"The two weeks..will probably be the most significant during any west pilot's professional career"....Ummm...I'd have to add that I feel the deepest and fullest, legitimate sympathy for anyone who's aviation career's "most significant" "two weeks" involved merely playing spectator at some trial.....

Snooze alarm resst.

You keep hitting snooze and you're going to end up waking up in a panic. "Oh ####, I missed that!"

 

[EastUS]

You keep hitting snooze and you're going to end up waking up in a panic. "Oh ####, I missed that!"

I thank you for your very kind concern, but; without taking the occassional risk, life can never be fully savored

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

I thank you for your very kind concern, but; without taking the occassional risk, life can never be fully savored

I know you're not snoozing. Bluffing yeah, but snoozing, no.

 

[cleardirect]

For those precious few that can read, (thanks for being so generous of spirit as to assume some can) and who are less enamoured of trite and meaningless propoganda; only the above line's of any actual value. = "In the event...."

"The two weeks..will probably be the most significant during any west pilot's professional career"....Ummm...I'd have to add that I feel the deepest and fullest, legitimate sympathy for anyone who's aviation career's "most significant" "two weeks" involved merely playing spectator at some trial.....

Snooze alarm resst.

“In the eventâ€￾ a conditional statement made by rational people where an outcome is uncertain. Unlike USAPA that told the east a new union would be able to negotiate seniority like a crew meal. Just who is spreading propaganda?

A rather large assumption on your part that we are playing spectator. There are a good number of people involved. Taken at your word the results will have no effect on your career so not significant for you. However for the 85% of the west pilots it certainly does. As so many out east point out. Seniority is everything.

If USAPA is allowed to use their tyranny of the majority to overthrow binding arbitration. It does have a major impact on our careers. Care to name another event that has a bigger effect on our careers then this trial? Except bankruptcy where we are truly are spectators.

Beside really don’t need your sympathy. I would prefer your acceptance of your obligations.

If the discussion about the trial is putting you to sleep. How about you set your alarm for around May 11. Wake up and come talk to us then.

 

[nostradamus]

ink blot test

 

[Tiger 1050]

ink blot test

Man! We must fly a lot of RJ's out east...