US Pilots Labor Thread 6/2-6/9 STAY ON TOPIC
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #152
Snoop,
Those are all interesting theories that Seham kept pounding on during the trial. Ripeness, system board, bad faith ect. None of it mattered, none of it had an effect. The DFR trial is OVER! Usapa was found liable. As it sits today. That is a fact. Continuing to rehash extraneous things is a waste of time. If it makes you and the other usapa supporters feel better go ahead.
If you want to spin up some fantasy about some miracle path to victory have at it. It really is sad though. The case was dismissed in NC. We had a trial in AZ. A judge looked at the NC case and decided that it was not ripe YET. That does not mean that it can not come back. In AZ we heard all of the facts and got to the end. NC never got started. So the NC case has nothing to do with the guilt of usapa in the DFR.
Nick Granath filed a lot of paperwork during this trial. Most of it was dismissed by the judge. Seham or Granath filed an emergency stay in the ninth circuit over class action. That failed with a two sentence dismissal.
I find it funny that the presidents message crowed about all of the "wins" that usapa had during the trial. Cleary was very happy about count 1 and count 2 being dismissed. Those counts were against the company not usapa. Yes they went to the grievance board. So in the end they have nothing to do with the DFR case. Win or lose it has no effect of the liability of usapa in the DFR suit. Make no mistake usapa is liable for DFR.
President's message
USAPA then obtained May 28-29, 2009, as hearing dates for the Addington plaintiffs' Count Two grievance. Last week, their attorneys abruptly requested an indefinite adjournment of the case. Arbitrator Bloch has held the Addington plaintiffs and the Company jointly liable for the cancellation fees.
Better check with central propaganda bureau. One of you is wrong.
Those are all interesting theories that Seham kept pounding on during the trial. Ripeness, system board, bad faith ect. None of it mattered, none of it had an effect. The DFR trial is OVER! Usapa was found liable. As it sits today. That is a fact. Continuing to rehash extraneous things is a waste of time. If it makes you and the other usapa supporters feel better go ahead.
If you want to spin up some fantasy about some miracle path to victory have at it. It really is sad though. The case was dismissed in NC. We had a trial in AZ. A judge looked at the NC case and decided that it was not ripe YET. That does not mean that it can not come back. In AZ we heard all of the facts and got to the end. NC never got started. So the NC case has nothing to do with the guilt of usapa in the DFR.
Nick Granath filed a lot of paperwork during this trial. Most of it was dismissed by the judge. Seham or Granath filed an emergency stay in the ninth circuit over class action. That failed with a two sentence dismissal.
I find it funny that the presidents message crowed about all of the "wins" that usapa had during the trial. Cleary was very happy about count 1 and count 2 being dismissed. Those counts were against the company not usapa. Yes they went to the grievance board. So in the end they have nothing to do with the DFR case. Win or lose it has no effect of the liability of usapa in the DFR suit. Make no mistake usapa is liable for DFR.
President's message
USAPA then obtained May 28-29, 2009, as hearing dates for the Addington plaintiffs' Count Two grievance. Last week, their attorneys abruptly requested an indefinite adjournment of the case. Arbitrator Bloch has held the Addington plaintiffs and the Company jointly liable for the cancellation fees.
Better check with central propaganda bureau. One of you is wrong.
The IAM membership voted in a new contract knowing the award was not in it
The majority of union members on USAirway property have voted on new contracts that invalided arbitration awards
Put a contract to vote if the majority of the members vote YES the contract is what it is……………………….RLA 101
Customer Service Agents had arbitration awards that the majority membership voted away
Without the bankruptcy judge involvement
One contract vote was pass by only 5 votes
Customer Service Agents had arbitration awards that the majority membership voted away
Without the bankruptcy judge involvement
One contract vote was pass by only 5 votes
What arbitration award was a apple and what arbitration award was a orange
I guess you can have a revote if union leadership misinforms there membership
luvthe9
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 9,464
- 14,119
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- A new survey shows that pilots at overnight cargo carriers FedEx(FDX Quote) and UPS(UPS Quote) command the highest salaries among the 11 largest U.S. airlines, while pilots at US Airways(LCC Quote) are the lowest paid. http://www.thestreet.com/_aol/story/105101...amp;cm_ite=Feed
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #157
Seniority arbitration? Majority on new contracts? Could you provide details.
Ever union contract voted on on this plant has seniority language in it
You must be a new guy the info is around
http://files.cwa-union.org/CwaNet/Mandator...on6-22-2001.pdf
http://files.cwa-union.org/CwaNet/Mandator...on6-22-2001.pdf
Can CWA get this arbitration award back?
The majority of the membership voted it out
hp_fa
Veteran
- Feb 19, 2004
- 3,290
- 178
Clear, I am not following this. The Addington plaintiffs are liable for what per Bloch? Who is the reference to "their attorneys" related to? I'm not getting whatever you are saying.
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #162
That had to do with overtime not seniority, that started as a grievance not as integration. Different set of rules.
Yes every contract has a seniority section in it. Does every contract have an arbitrated seniority list attached?
Pulling irrelevant cases to support your unsupportable position is a waste of time.
Metroyet
Veteran
- Nov 1, 2008
- 2,571
- 5,664
I guess the one with the DFR CONVICTION ATTACHED TO IT is an apple, and all the others,
(the ones where the Bargaining Agent wasn't convicted of violating it's duty to fairly represent
said members) are oranges.
Hope that helps you differentiate reality from fantasy.
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #164
"Their attorneys" refer to the Addington attorneys. The liability would be a cancellation fee.
This is what snoop said.
(Plaintiffs will pay for the cancellation, not the Co. or USAPA) No doubt they were ordered to by Harper. But a no-show may be as bad as a loss.
That quote was from the presidents message. Cleary stated that both the plaintiffs and the company was liable for the cancellation fee. Snoop stated that only the plaintiffs were liable. One of them is incorrect.
The agents just want the final binding arbitration award
WHAT HAPPEN TO THE AWARD ?????????????
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/031378p.pdf
Here is a DFR seniority case that some Customer services agents at USAirways had against there union
The CWA found itself in a difficult position. However the union
read Article 12, Section C, it was bound to ignore the wishes of some
set of workers, be it senior employees in the ten closed locations or
more junior employees in numerous other locations. But the fact that
its decision disappointed some of its workers does not mean in itself
that the CWA failed to fairly represent any of its members. The duty
of fair representation prohibits only "invidious" discrimination, such
as discrimination based on constitutionally protected categories like
race or gender, or discrimination that arises from animus or prejudice.
O’Neill, 499 U.S. at 81; see also Considine v. Newspaper Agency
Corp., 43 F.3d 1349, 1359-60 (10th Cir. 1994).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
