US Pilots labor thread 4/17-

[Barrister]

Crazy thing that TA. There was supposed to be a third list, yet there is not. Growth flying was to be shared, yet it was not. Pilot operational integration was to occur within 12 months of cancelation of contract negotiations, yet it did not.

So if the reps bring us a contract, but the east renegs on their side of the deal, it is our reps fault?

Watch Parker's video.....you are flying way more East routes than the other way around....but don't let facts get in the way of your sound bites....You are owed nothing by the East. Nothing at all...especially our FO to Capt. upgrades, which you will never see.

VNIIMN
NPJB

 

[Pi brat]

You have the right to vote NO, but the east east has no right to conspire with USAPA to prevent a vote.

I agree 100%. I doubt you remember, but I'm one of the few east guys that have said a good enough contract would pass, even with the Nic attached.

 

[cleardirect]

Watch Parker's video.....you are flying way more East routes than the other way around....but don't let facts get in the way of your sound bites....You are owed nothing by the East. Nothing at all...especially our FO to Capt. upgrades, which you will never see.

VNIIMN
NPJB

WRONG!

You owe us the integrity of living up to your bargains. The east pilots agreed to binding arbitration you owe us that. The east pilots took us into a new union controlled by the east pilots. You owe us a duty of fair representation, you have failed at that too.

When the ninth rules and usapa is found guilty of damages and legal fees you will owe us that.

usapa owes us the duty of getting a better contract in a timely manner, failed after two years and three years under ALPA. You owe us a contract.

No the east pilots owe the west pilots alot. Including an apology for dragging us into your world by behaving badly. You owe us for making us explain to the rest of the industry that we are not east pilots.

Oh and you are going to owe the RICO guys a big bunch of money.

 

[Pi brat]

Yes, the most senior fos who have never held a captain award are at about the 12 years of service mark. If not there already, they will be very soon.

Even with the bankruptcy, previously the longest time to an upgrade was maybe 9 years, roughly.

Yeah, I know. As I said things change. My first was at about 7 years, second 14, third 22.

 

[nic4us]

Wherever you are now you best get comfortable. I told you that a while ago....One question...willyou vote for any contract without a min fleet count where it is today and no less, if not how long before Parker downsizes PHX.....Oh yea, I remember now...it won't matter cause you got NIC.......NOT.

Don'tcount your Nickins before they hatch.

VNIIMN
NPJB

One answere,

As I refuse to join an organization founded for the purpose of harming the West, stealing fellow pilots jobs and all around low life behavior, I will not be voting on any tenative agreement.

 

[nycbusdriver]

This is intended as a serious question.

Why is Seham practically begging some judge, either Wake or the 9th, to refer Seham & Co. for review by the bar association? Since when does an attorney with a case already under submission than ask the appeals court to become a fact court, totally bypassing the trial court, which had specifically retained jurisdiction of the injunction?

My question is totally serious. This is ridiculous behavior.

This is intended as a serious response.

I don't have a license to practice law. It appears from your own posts that you don't either. Seham does.

Maybe....just maybe...as a practicing attorney with decades of experience he understands the law and the process better than you. My guess is that the judges do, too. My guess is also that you are going to be very disappointed when no judge will refer Seham to the bar association for review. Maybe you need to go back to the law library and study, attend a few more classes, get your license and practice for 10 or 20 years to understand what is going on. As they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

My response is totally serious. That was a .............. post you've made.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Why waste the energy. The USAPA idiots will ultimately self inflict more harm upon themselves than any outsider could...it's their M.O.

Well then, why to you (and your west buddies) object so vehemently to every little thing they do at USAPA? Wouldn't it be better to shut up and let it ride if they were indeed doing so much damage to themselves? The incessant postings tells a very different tale.

 

[hp_fa]

Maybe Seham is looking for sanctions. That way during the damages and legal fees they can cry about a biased judge and demand a different judge or change of venue again.

I don't see any good reason why any attorney would be "looking for sanctions" upon themselves.

I've said before that I really believe that Seham had a mindset going into all of this that: a) the West folks would never fight all of this and/or stay in the fight over the long term; and, b ) that he thought that he would come in and show the tumbleweed lawyers (and judges) how real law is practiced. Well, Judge Wake shut that down. However, now he is trying the same form of stunts not just in front of a federal judge, but federal appellate judges. This makes no sense. It is the kind of buffoonery that people grew to expect from Orly Taitz. (You can also think of it as a blackjack player who loses and continues to double his bets to get back his money, while suffering exponential losses.)

Perhaps Seham knows that this will be his last client ever because of the way he has failed so badly. Use the excuse that he did everything he could but got disbarred. To bad he will take the rest of his lawyers with him. He might be trying to avoid a malpractice suit from usapa for selling them a bad theory.

Unlikely, if for no other reason that the wheels of the attorney discipline process run very slowly. I will point out that there is a line between doing "everything you could" for a client that is within the rules, and outside the rules. I have previously posted here possible violations of the applicable ER's (NY ethical rules) by Seham. The most recent filing to the 9th does nothing to improve any of that.

Finally, the possible malpractice defense issue. If Seham is accused of malpractice his insurer gets involved and Seham then gets an attorney. That attorney will, if it happens, inherit one hell of a mess. Among the things that the insurer and counsel would need to figure out is how could Seham be so out of the mainstream in his advice and how he acted as counsel for the formation of USAPA, general counsel, trial counsel and appellate counsel.

Perhaps his firm is so far away from their normal little area of law that they have NO idea what they are doing now.

I believe that his firm claims labor law expertise.

Or maybe he is just running the bill in a last minute frenzy. Knowing that the ninth is not the place for this, he gets a little slap then files with the district court and bills usapa again.

Between the trial court and appellate court shenanigans I doubt any response would be a gentle slap. However, if Seham were, arguably, running a bill than it would be probably be far more profitable to be running a trial bill for damages.

Anyone think that if there is a merger Seham will be the surviving lawyer? Nope the golden goose is going to die.

That is true.

 

[nic4us]

....You are owed nothing by the East. Nothing at all...especially our FO to Capt. upgrades, which you will never see.

VNIIMN
NPJB

Tell it to the judge, in the courtroom where usapa has been found guilty, when the damages are awarded.

Or better yet, tell him you are not going to pay, because you have a complete contempt of the rule of law and of contractual obligations or binding arbitrations.

We do not want your FO to Capt. upgrades, we want our upgrades, seats, recalls etc. that usapa is trying to keep from us, and unilaterally award to east pilots.

 

[cactusboy53]

But who testified that it would have passed? They testified what might have been, but it never hit the table. We will never know because we never got there. We could argue until the cows come home about why, or how, but absent a vote we will never know what would have been, and without a contract we have no single seniority list, and without a single seniority list................separate ops.

All you westies just answer this: Did the TA allow for separate votes on a joint contract that effectively gave EACH side veto power? Yes or No please. No woulda, shoulda, coulda.

Passed, not passed?? Who knows. The fact remains that it could have been put up for a vote 1.5 to 2 years ago. The reason it never hit the table is because the east pilots WALKED away from the negotiation table. The only parties remaining were the company and the west pilot NC reps. You can't argue with those facts....well you can, but as John Adams said: "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." This seems to be the passion of the east.

To answer your other question, I believe it was separate ratification under ALPA. Now with USAPA it will be a single vote to ratify a contract proposal. No side can stop a contract if enough people vote in favor. If you and your side are so confident that no contract with the Nic will see the light of day, perhaps we should kick the NAC into high gear and get this to the table before the 3rd USAPA anniversary.

USAPA: Two years of empty promises, MILLIONS of UNION DOLLARS on FRUITLESS, POINTLESS, USELESS LITIGATION, delay and big stipends & cars for the USAPA leadership team.

 

[cleardirect]

This is intended as a serious response.

I don't have a license to practice law. It appears from your own posts that you don't either. Seham does.

Maybe....just maybe...as a practicing attorney with decades of experience he understands the law and the process better than you. My guess is that the judges do, too. My guess is also that you are going to be very disappointed when no judge will refer Seham to the bar association for review. Maybe you need to go back to the law library and study, attend a few more classes, get your license and practice for 10 or 20 years to understand what is going on. As they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

My response is totally serious. That was a .............. post you've made.

Then you missed the response to the Ninth from a lawyer that has all of that experience. Try and stay up with the rest of us. Because that is the exact point that he brought to the court.

Two guesses and missed them both.

get your license and practice for 10 or 20 years to understand what is going on. As they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Good advice, follow it. Listening to Seham is getting all of us in trouble.

 

[hp_fa]

This is intended as a serious response.

I accept it as such.

I don't have a license to practice law. It appears from your own posts that you don't either. Seham does.

Correct.

Maybe....just maybe...as a practicing attorney with decades of experience he understands the law and the process better than you.

His main thrust seems to be well out-of-touch with what most labor lawyers believe. Does that make him wrong? Not by itself.

As to the "process", I understand it pretty well. He should understand it better than I do, although I do have more overall experience with Arizona law and process than he does.

How does an attorney with decades of experience manage to aggravate a federal trial judge and then turn around and do it again with a federal appeals court before whom he has a matter submitted for a decision? Seham ignored the fact that Judge Wake still specifically retained jurisdiction of the injunction and that the 9th had previously refused to stay that injunction. Then he went and filed a "emergency" motion that would require an appeals court to make determinations of fact, not law, while specifically avoiding the court that is fully authorized to make factual determinations. Seham's course of action was to file his motion before Judge Wake and if he lost there he could then appeal that decision, perhaps in some form of emergency request. However, Seham clearly violated the process.

My guess is that the judges do, too. My guess is also that you are going to be very disappointed when no judge will refer Seham to the bar association for review.

Maybe. Maybe not.

My response is totally serious. That was a .............. post you've made.

I accept your response as serious and am treating it that way. As for the ........... post thing, I am simply stating what I believe to be the case. I also doubt that any judges are reading my opinions here so don't think that I am tainting the judges.

Thank you for your response.

 

[signals]

The way I see it, this fight is heading for the Supreme Court that WILL end up sending it to the original ruling...but what do I know? Wait for the pudding! :blink:

 

[hp_fa]

I'm not understanding what you are saying. Could you clarify it a bit please?

 

[signals]

I'm not understanding what you are saying. Could you clarify it a bit please?

From my understanding USAPA did not agree with a court's ruling that they are basically wrong and they are a rogue union. They will probably continue their appeals and fight right up to the Supreme Court. My personal experience is that the SC will rule with the original court ruling. This is just an opinion on my part B)