US Pilots Labor Thread 6/2-6/9 STAY ON TOPIC

[cleardirect]

Can anyone confirm that this is true?

I'll point out that my trial notes actually comment favorably upon Mr. Bringle despite my so called slanted view of the world.

(The truth is that I thought that he was trying really hard to be an advocate for his client. He also, to the best of my knowledge, had no role in the legal advice provided to USAPA outside of the litigation. Of course the same can't be said for Seham who is acting as general counsel and the main trial attorney for USAPA despite the charade of Bringle being designated as "lead counsel" at the trial. BTW, I say charade simply because Seham had so aggravated Judge Wake prior to trial (actually by December 2008) that he found it necessary to do so and yet which USAPA attorney provided the Opening Statement, Closing Statement and handled the direct examination of USAPA's most important witnesses?)

Yes. Confirmed, Brengle is out. Want to bet that was Seham's call? No dissent from any quarter allowed.

 

[AWE_SHUCKS]

QUOTE (AWE_SHUCKS @ Jun 7 2009, 12:28 PM)
We don't want to waste time with "the best possible contract using Nicolau" because our goal is something else.

Now that is a really interesting statement. Care to elaborate?

How is this remotely interesting, am I missing something here?

 

[cleardirect]

The west currently enjoys about 20% more in compensation than the East (who is all too willing to appeal to the 9th)...what is the problem here? The union is conducting it's business as directed by the membership. It's meeting with a company who now wants a mediator that is only available a few days per quarter...but, hey...they're in there swingin' the bat for you. They are also pursuing an appeal process in accordance with the majority of the membership.

Your complaining changes none of these facts.

Your "payback" is laughable under the circumstances.

I am glad that you find it funny.

What really stuns me is how quickly and easily you accept ignorance. Read my post a little closer. The east attitude and actions are nothing to be proud of as you seem to be.

As I said you wonder why the east are the lowest paid pilots in the industry.
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10510106/1/...-pilot-pay.html

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

I am glad that you find it funny.

What really stuns me is how quickly and easily you accept ignorance. Read my post a little closer. The east attitude and actions are nothing to be proud of as you seem to be.

As I said you wonder why the east are the lowest paid pilots in the industry.
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10510106/1/...-pilot-pay.html

The mistake you continue to make is the assumption that your opinion matters as either:

1) persuading to the majority of the membership

2) thats your perceptions ferom a personal standapoint mean nothing as it relates to the business of the union.

I find little of this funny with the notable exception of the continual bravado demonstrated by yourself and others in the "persuasion" tactic for a contract that the East needs more than you do (paywise)..but you drool over "Nicwise"

THAT...I find hilarious.

 

[ClueByFour]

So there you have it, hp. By a 8-1 vote, the Supremes said DFR litigation expense is germane. What did USAPAs auditors say about the basis of germane and non-germane expenses? 94%! Don’t all members of the bargaining unit have to pay legitimate germane expenses? Answer to “Whose goanna pay for all of this….â€￾ Thats easy, everybody, East and West, regardless of membership status. Sniping, taking potshots, flame bating isnt going to change the Supreme Court ruling.
Good night, hp. Hope the above doesnt give you nitemares.

That's not what the Supremes said. Read my aforementioned post about the actual test that Ellis calls for. Gonna probably lose that one, but don't let context get in the way. Your bluster about how the DFR would pan out was incredibly accurate, after all...

 

[ClueByFour]

Wow, why are you so threatened by HP's posts? I find them intelligent and informing. He was right all along on the DFR case. Its an interesting subject and people are free to post here.

I'd try every logical fallacy of debate myself were I trying to polish the turd that is the USAPA land-grab attempt.

 

[nic4us]

I am certain that "filing" must be, then, available to the public. Care to post a link?

Actually, now I am informed West opened sect 6 had 1 meeting pre-election and secured a date post-election for future meeting, and informed President Bradford of the date to which he replied there would only be joint negotiations, so it looks like USAPA canceled West sect 6.

I found the letter on the AWAPPA web archive but am unable to attach a copy, maybe one of my more computer savy fellow West pilots can oblige your need for the verifiable paper trail of evidence. Its all nice and on ALPA letterhead and all. Says we opened April 14 2008, and secured a second date of May 28, 2008.

I also believe there may be reference to the section 6 opening in the Addington trial, as McIlvenna either talked about it during testimony or in deposition. So you might find something in the trial transcripts.

Still looking for the Bradford reply letter, but when I originally read it, it was only one sentence long, and had, from a West perspective, a very snide air to it.

 

[nic4us]

But back to the latest caus-celeb, just when we thought AWAPPA had been marginalized by their big brothers in AOL, along comes this from AWAPPA:

ATTENTION OBJECTORS!
Germane expenses to be challenged

All non-member objectors should have received USAPA's 2008 Germane Expense Report in the mail by now.

So, AOL says join, AWAPPA says object.

First, AWAPPA and AOL are two seperate corporations. Each has a different objective, and way of doing bussiness.

AOL did not say join, attorney's from both advised to join, however, there are still a large contingent of West pilots who, contrary to this advice, will not join.

Those of us who elected to be objectors will use are rights as such, just as members will use their rights, and AWAPPA will defend those rights.

The only thing I find confusing is that AWAPPA thinks I open mail from USAPA. That all goes straight to the round file with all the other junk mail. I would not know how much I do not owe them, or what fees are germane, or who gets elected when. What I do know is I am not joining, not paying, not participating, not acknowledging in any way, an organization designed to steal from me.

Did read USAPA's memorandum to the court on what it thinks would be an equitable injunctive relief. Let me get this straight, they are asking for either seperate ratification of any CBA containing the Nic( so they can continue their DFR behavior ), or they want to put out a CBA with the Nic for a one time vote with dual ratification and if it gets voted down the injunction disolves ( so they can continue their DFR behavior). Either way the east would have a veto over the jury. Who do you people think you are dealing with? I had thought that the remedy would be very mild, far from what AOL was asking, but I am not so sure anymore. USAPA just asked the judge to let it ignore the jury's ruling, continue its behavior and press on like this never happened. I now think USAPA is about to be taught a very costly lesson on why you do not break contracts, why you do not try to manipulate the legal system, and why a "deal is a deal". I am starting to think USAPA is going to wish they never met in that van by the river.

One more thing since I am on a roll.

I would think USAPA may want to reconsider and drop the catus 18 appeal.

 

[john john]

That might be true, except that the west contract became amendable while ALPA was still the CBA and the west had their own MEC. Even their own MEC, though legally entitled to do so, did not start Section 6 negotiations at the appropriate time. Can you figure out a way to blame that on USAPA, too?

When does the East contract become amendable????

 

[BoeingBoy]

End of this year I believe.

Jim

 

[john john]

End of this year I believe.

Jim

So start Section 6 negotiations then with language of intergrading the WEST
Then bring it to vote before the membership
Allow the court thing to continue till results are favorable to the majority of the membership
The time line to file for Section 6 negotiations should be close to the amendable
date. NMB should have fun with this one. What a great way to end the intergradation and to have a transition of EAST/WEST. Negotiate with the membership and management under NMB rules. Negotiations will have a different light on them then the past negotiation

 

[cleardirect]

So start Section 6 negotiations then with language of intergrading the WEST
Then bring it to vote before the membership
Allow the court thing to continue till results are favorable to the majority of the membership

OK! If you think so.

The "court thing" will continue until it is favorable to the court and the rule of law, not the majority.

 

[john john]

OK! If you think so.

The "court thing" will continue until it is favorable to the court and the rule of law, not the majority.

Both parties can come to terms the appeal can be withdrawn

 

[Megasnoop]

Both parties can come to terms the appeal can be withdrawn

Wish you were right, JJ. But both sides are so polarized, especially the West with their Addington "win." This has to play out in the Appeals Court. Thats the long and short of it.

Wow, why are you so threatened by HP's posts? I find them intelligent and informing. He was right all along on the DFR case. Its an interesting subject and people are free to post here.

hp_fa's posts are nothing but hashed-over West spin, presented as from some kind of uninterested third party. Glad you enjoy them. His disinterest doesn’t pass the stink test, but great fodder to debate. After the judge’s instructions, was there any doubt how the jury would rule? Hard to believe it took the jury a whole 3 hours. No such bench bias on appeal.

That might be true, except that the west contract became amendable while ALPA was still CBA and the west had their own MEC. Even their own MEC, though legally entitled to do so, did not start Section 6 negotiations at the appropriate time. Can you figure out a way to blame that on USAPA, too?

It's ALL our fault, NYC! ! Ford's Theater, Pearl Harbor, The Grassy Knoll, 9-11. It's ALL our fault! East MEC voted unanimously to support their Section 6, but ALPA National said NO! Now they want USAPA to negotiate a separate contract for them and their <200 members in good standing? Like how long is that going to take? Fact is, the company has rejected any negotiations except for a single contract. I don’t blame the West MEC as much as I blame ALPA National and their laziness.

But on the ALPA/USAPA conspiracy, I think Ive discovered it. Mcalvenna (representing ALPA) talking with Bradford before the election? This gets more off-the-wall with every Nic4us chat.

My guess, under the current mindset, is 48-60 months away. The 9th Circuit appeal ruling (about 13 months from now) and then either a Writ of Certiorari or proceedings in the trial court (12 months). Follow that by the mere procedure involved in negotiating a contract (36-48 months) and you get into the ballpark I am predicting. The Company could speed this up if they chose to if they saw an advantage to fast-track negotiations, but I am not counting on that happening. Of course USAPA could also speed this along by accepting Nicolau as the seniority for the past merger and then using DOH for future mergers, but I don't see that happening either. So, accordingly, I fail to see any new contract for years to come.

Another boring weekend? Ill agree with you on this, if the appeal was over tomorrow, unless they get their way on compensation, the company WILL drag this out for the next 3-4 years. Too bad your West supporters cant accept that. They wouldn’t be so spooled up.

Actually, I failed to fully realize the harm that USAPA is conceivably doing to the West folks because their contract was already amenable and all of this delay is actually costing West folks money from their already amenable contract. The West's contract has now been amenable for nearly 2.5 years whereas the East contract has not.

As NYC said, hp_fa, the West did it to themselves when they rejected their own right to go to Section 6 back in June 2006. But with only Kirby’s 4% raises, do you honestly think West pilots would vote for a new, separate contract? Any alleged conversation between Mcalvenna (with official ALPA status) and Bradford (no status until after the election) is meaningless. After the election, McIlvenna, West MEC and even ALPA had no standing. As duly elected CBA, representing one combined group, USAPA could not negotiate a separate contract for the West. Even if we could, does anyone really believe the West would pass a 4% pay raise?

 

[HPearlyretiree]

hp_fa's posts are nothing but hashed-over West spin, presented as from some kind of uninterested third party. Glad you enjoy them. His disinterest doesn’t pass the stink test, but great fodder to debate. After the judge’s instructions, was there any doubt how the jury would rule? Hard to believe it took the jury a whole 3 hours. No such bench bias on appeal.

Sounds a lot like jealousy. HP_FA knows the law, and he knows it quite well, and he has been right all along, I can see where that might bother you, especially in the future. You are trying to create some wild conspiracy theory about the trial. You have nothing but your bias and a few kooky notions. The more you try to push some "evil Judge Wake and his instructions" theory, the worse you look.

hp_fa has a legal background, you don't, he has been constantly right, you haven't.