For all of you east pilots that think that somehow, some miracle is going to come along a save DOH or the Nicolau is going to simply disappear. May I suggest that you get the accurate information from the horse’s mouth? Read the July 7th hearing transcript.
I understand that you guys sometimes have a problem reading transcripts. The Nicolau transcripts would answer a lot of your questions. But the 92 pages are very enlightening. Starting about page 70 to the end. That should relieve everyone of any fantasies about the Nicolau not being used as the list.
Just a couple of examples:
Pg. 72, Judge Wake: The only thing -- I must admit I was a bit taken aback at the strength of the objection of that, because the only reason I could think of for USAPA wanting to not be required to follow through with that promise to negotiate a single Collective Bargaining Agreement would be to further discriminate to the advantage of East Pilots and to the disadvantage of West Pilots indirectly to make up for the unachieved favored position in the Seniority List.
Pg. 81 Judge Wake: One negotiating chip would be simply to negotiate pay raises for the East Pilots, forget about the West Pilots, and forget about the Nicolau Award. That would be a negotiating chip, wouldn't it?
Pg. 84 Judge Wake: It's a wide open door to the continuation of the very kind of bad faith discrimination the jury found already. And it renders it unenforceable by the Court as opposed to a remedy that takes advantage of the very responsibility that every union has. I'm just -- like I said, I have been listening for a specific as opposed to abstract and theoretical reason that would justify the union doing a CBA for some pilots and not others in the context and history of this case. And I have heard nothing specific yet. And I am mindful of the fact that the reason I am here is to remedy a proven wrong. I'm not making abstract pronouncements about union rights. I have a proven wrong and a duty to remedy it. So I'm very concerned about your position, Mr. Middlebrook.
Pg. 91 Judge Wake: I will tell you, I have done a lot of work on this and given it a lot of thought, and my sense arrived at after considering many alternatives is that it is essential to have this protection against discrimination by indirection. And that the circumstances, the history of the clear and abundant bad faith and discrimination here means that the Court's not running on a blank slate and USAPA's not running on a blank slate. We're dealing with a history of proven pervasive violation of duty, and therefore, it's necessary for the Court to come up with a rule, with a remedy that will restore the neutral and even-handed motivations to the process and, in particular, to the ratification process. Now, I haven't heard anything that would change my mind to the question.
And my favorite statement:
If you want to make more of a record I don’t want to reject it out of hand. I’m just persuaded that the alternative is literally to take a wrongdoing union and give it an injunction that says go and sin no more. I think I owe it to the law to come up with a remedy that does not rely on the honor system as to whether it’s going to be complies with.
