US Pilots Labor Topic-Aug 1-5

[cactusboy53]

Mind if I answer. USAPA is doing exactly what the VAST MAJORITY of pilots want them to do.

How nice for you. That's awesome! Those will be the same pilots that will have to pay our requested legal fees and damages (if awarded, of course). I do hope that the failure of getting the "snap back" won't interfere with your ability to pay up.

It didn't have to be this way, but you have led us down this path.

 

[captainJack]

.... any true evidence ....

Opinion presented as fact. Oh, yeah.

 

[hp_fa]

Yes, question: why would everybody be happy? I would think the West pilots may have something to worry about. Is that not true? USAPA won an expedited appeal from the 9th, yes? How is that cause for happiness for the West ?

I kind of wondered the same. However, as I have said many times I don't have secret access or know the secret handshake. I have a few friends there, but nothing more.

Anyway, to answer what you really asked, I believe the West folks share the desire to have this resolved so that East and West can hopefully move on together. Right or wrong, that's my read on it.

Yes, question: you left out about the written arguments that will be submitted before the oral arguments. It would be in those written briefs that USAPA will lay out most of its appeal. Is that true?

Yes. The prior posts today had said that and I didn't repeat the actual briefing schedule.

Once the Appellee's Response brief is filed the case will be assigned to a panel. (Yes, I know that this is before any Appellant's Reply brief would be filed.) The case management lawyers at the Ninth Circuit then read the briefs and classify the case as to its complexity and the volume of the case materials. The still-secret panel receives all the briefs and all the motions and transcripts dealing with the appeal and they read them all prior to the day the case has its oral argument. So the briefs will be a large part, probably a huge majority, of the materials the judges use as a basis for their decision.

Having been through oral arguments before an appeals court myself, this is where the judges ask THEIR questions. Is that true? And would not those questions be based upon the previous written briefs/arguments?

Yes and likely, although the questions could arise independently from review of trial testimony, Judge Wake's Statement of Facts and Law, or anything else that causes the judges to have a question.

Another question: wasn't it you and a number of West pilots who thought USAPA's appeal would take at least 14 months to 2 years to be heard?

Yes. I didn't think that Appellees would chose not to oppose the Motion to Expedite, nor did I think that the Court of Appeals would grant the motion.

It seems to me that the West has already decided what the outcome will be. They can whistle past all the graveyards in PHX but that won't get them an answer any sooner than the court of appeals ruling. Isn't that true?

I'm not sure if there was a question there or not. I will answer this way and if you have a follow-up I will answer that when it is asked.

I do not believe that reversible error occurred. I also have enough experience that I am never surprised that an appellate court surprises the parties and the attorneys. If you have noticed, I haven't been doing much a large amount of actual opining on what the court may or may not do simply because I know the "surprise" factor. Folks have asked my opinion and I have given it, but I don't consider any matter submitted before and trier-of-fact or any decider-of-law to be a slam dunk, bring out the beer, affair. (It seems to me I have said something akin to that many times. Hmmm.)

It also seems to me that the jury in the DFR case practiced jury nullification much like in the OJ trial although I don't know what the proper term is for this type of thing in a civil trial. Perhaps you know? As I recall, they deliberated only 3 hours, is that true? And that after such a complicated case for a jury of "plain citizens"? That is certainly true.

Jury nullification would be the correct term. It also can be true of civil law and not just criminal law. They were out about three mours, but we don't know exactly when they started on Friday nor when exactly they came to their unanimous conclusion. So when asked I say it was about three hours.

As for the time they were out I said many times that the demeanor of counsel has a lot to do with the psychology of the case and whether the jury believes the story told to them by one side or the other. A trial is basically theater. The parties put on their evidence under the rules made and enforced by the trial court.

I said early on that the jury had turned Seham off like a switch. They got tired of him, his arguments and his demeanor. The same was true of Lucas Middlebrook. Jim Bringle was the only USAPA attorney who seemed to have good vibes with the jury. Seham should have never taken as much of a role in front of the jury. I'm not sure that the end result would be different but I don't think it would have only taken three hours to deliberate.

I know you have admitted bias towards the West but you do seem to answer questions out of some kind of knowledge you have obtained which is not always laced with your bias. That's all I am asking of you now.......your none-biased answers to the questions you have invited.

I haven't been reading this forum lately so if I have asked duplicate questions, please excuse me. Thank you.

I believe the majority of my admitted bias is that I believe the West folks are right about the facts and the law. Admittedly I thought that way before trial, but the trial cemented my mind. I also have stated that Seham, in my view, disrespected the Arizona attorneys and judge. In my opinion he had a New Yorker's superiority complex in that he was going to show all these desert-loving hicks what law was all about. Oops. As the phrase goes, "it sucks to be him."

Thank you for your kind closing and you are welcome for the response.

 

[cactusboy53]

Hiding stuff is not good.

Try posting URLs or a reference to those supposed proclamations.

Realize, when the CBA submits a "list", management must acknowledge that. The fact that is subject to a more modern CBA seems to escape you.

and, what injunction was issued?

Jack;
During the arbitration process, the transcripts were readily available to AWA pilots. Were they not available to AAA pilots as well?

After the arbitration, Nicolau published that award. The award is available on many sites, and if read in its entirety will describe his logic of how the list was produced. Further, the two pilot neutrals opine largely with arbitrator Nicolau.

All of the legal documents and transcripts for the DFR lawsuit are also available on numerous sites. The court transcripts are available to the public. Some gems included the company stating that the Nicolau list was the list, that the Kirby Proposal + additional $$ was in the hopper until the AAA jnc pulled out of negotiations, etc. After the jury found USAPA guilty (less than 2 hours of deliberation), the judge crafted a remedy that includes an injunction. It basically states that the Nicolau award in done. It will not be fenced, changed, watered down, etc. It further requires USAPA to negotiated in good faith a JOINT contract. Further, it basically precludes them from separate contract negotiations.

Having read these posts on this and other sites, you should have picked up on these details, right? Of course if you had accessed all of these public documents, you would not request that someone bring proof by means of some URL sites either.

It just seems that no amount of "spelling it out" to some participants will be of any good. If denied by the 9th Appellate court & some assessments for lawyer fees & damages, would they then believe???? I bet not.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Hawkhunter,

USA320Pilot comments: Hawkhunter what's your opinion of Rich's comments I bolded so you could see them clearer?

Hawkhunter responded: “Everybody has an opinion. Mine is ALPA has done far worse. Do you think it would be any better for us if ALPA was still here? Did national take any pay cuts when we did? Did ALPA take ANY type of cut at all when all the other airlines filed? The boys in Herndon got raises for crying out loud. I can go on and on. I know what your agenda is and I could care less what you post on this board. Actually the odds are with us because, you have been wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME.â€

USA320pilot comments: Hawkhunter, you avoided answering my question. More on that shortly. Let me answer your questions first. Yes, I believe we would be much better off of ALPA had won the Representation Election. I agree with those who believe the Nicolau Award is a travesty, but both pilot group agreed to binding arbitration and the East pilots reneged on their agreement. I strongly believe if ALPA had remained on the property the Nicolau Award would not be implemented as is because the AWA West MEC could not sue for DFR to force George Nicolau’s Opinion & Award to be implemented. The Wye River discussions were the starting (not the end) point of mitigation discussions and the parties agreed to continue the talks if ALPA won the election. And, the MEC’s lawsuit to through out the Nicolau Award in D.C. Superior Court would have been heard last December.

As far as ALPA National taking pay cuts Chris Beebe did when the US Airways East pilots did. But, let me ask you this, did USAPA just enrich them self with the Officers and some Committee members provide them self without a membership vote provide them self a huge stipend, permit every pilot who is one of their Elite and would be a line pilot reserve to obtain 85 hours pay at least A30 F/O Int’l rates, that also boosts their DC Plan? And, did they just lease brand new vehicles to be paid by union members for USAPA’s personal use?

What raises in Herndon are you talking about? No rumor mongering, just the facts.

Now back to my questions. What’s your opinion of Rich Alter’s comments that:

1. USAPA “promised transparency and an organization based on democratic principles, yet you vote behind closed doors and give yourselves pay raises knowing you have deceitfully prevented any recall actions from being proffered.â€

2. I, along with other members of the previous R & I Committee offered to write a differing view that would have given all pilots the entire story before they committed to this waste of hard earned money. USAPA refused to publish our side of the story."

3. Things are actually worse now than they have ever been. The company gives USAPA leadership no respect or credibility. That has lead to real pain and suffering by many pilots and their families. That wouldn't have happened under the previous bargaining agent.

Hawkhunter, I answered each of your questions. Can you provide me specific information on your comment the Herndon pay raises and tell me what you think about Rich’s 3 comments I listed above?

Thanks.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[captainJack]

Jack;
During the arbitration process, the transcripts were readily available to AWA pilots. Were they not available to AAA pilots as well?

After the arbitration, Nicolau published that award. The award is available on many sites, and if read in its entirety will describe his logic of how the list was produced. Further, the two pilot neutrals opine largely with arbitrator Nicolau.

All of the legal documents and transcripts for the DFR lawsuit are also available on numerous sites. The court transcripts are available to the public. Some gems included the company stating that the Nicolau list was the list, that the Kirby Proposal + additional $$ was in the hopper until the AAA jnc pulled out of negotiations, etc. After the jury found USAPA guilty (less than 2 hours of deliberation), the judge crafted a remedy that includes an injunction. It basically states that the Nicolau award in done. It will not be fenced, changed, watered down, etc. It further requires USAPA to negotiated in good faith a JOINT contract. Further, it basically precludes them from separate contract negotiations.

Having read these posts on this and other sites, you should have picked up on these details, right? Of course if you had accessed all of these public documents, you would not request that someone bring proof by means of some URL sites either.

It just seems that no amount of "spelling it out" to some participants will be of any good. If denied by the 9th Appellate court & some assessments for lawyer fees & damages, would they then believe???? I bet not.

Saying Url are available and actually making them available are two different things. Your reluctance is telling of a liar. Try to change that.

 

[USA320Pilot]

captainjack,

HPDriver said: “The company has stated on several occasions and on record as the Nicolau list being the only seniority list they recognize.â€￾

captainjack asked: “Reference, please.â€￾

USA320pilot comments: HP-FA attended Judge Wake’s final pre-remedy hearing on July 16. HP_FA said in a Usaviaiton.com post, “(US Airways attorney Robert) Siegel went on to state that the Company's position was that it wanted a single CBA and that it wanted to avoid labor unrest. Also, he stated that the Company accepts the Nicolau seniority list as being the seniority list for any negotiations.â€￾

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[spike99]

Nice reach, but not credible.

Anyone who had been paying attention knew what evidence the court would and would not allow. Only USAPA and their supporters believed that the trial would be about the alleged unfairness of the Nicolau award.

That was never what this trial was about. The ninth circuit is not gong to hear any of the excluded evidence either. It is not germain to the question before the court.

It appears that you will soon attach the Kangaroo appellation to the ninth circuit as well, for when they find that USAPA's appeal has no merit they must too be relegated to kangaroo status.

I'm not a lawyer, but I would think part of the appeal process would be for the court to decide if Judge Wake did allow pertinent information for the trial. In their decision on this, it would include their review of case law, and seeing if they agreed with the decisions of Judge Wake on what was or wasn't germaine. If they find his decisions excluded germaine information, there would be another trial at the very least. If they decided he was too far off the mark, after citing conflicting case law, the decision could be overturned in its entirety. Like I've said before, we don't have anything to loose by waiting. Spare me the propaganda, about the paltry raise I might have gotten, I know what the cost would be being stapled on the bottom of the list.

 

[captainJack]

captainjack,

HPDriver said: “The company has stated on several occasions and on record as the Nicolau list being the only seniority list they recognize.â€￾

captainjack asked: “Reference, please.â€￾

USA320pilot comments: HP-FA attended Judge Wake’s final pre-remedy hearing on July 16. HP_FA said in a Usaviaiton.com post, “(US Airways attorney Robert) Siegel went on to state that the Company's position was that it wanted a single CBA and that it wanted to avoid labor unrest. Also, he stated that the Company accepts the Nicolau seniority list as being the seniority list for any negotiations.â€￾

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Yes, they have to say they accepted "the list". It is law. Until another list is presented. Are you so silly you cannot understand this? Take your weak spine somewhere else. Please.

 

[USA320Pilot]

captainJack,

captainjack asked: “Where did USAPA promise a "contract" in three months? I guess I missed those little gems. Could you point that out to me? I, as well as you, have the experience to say that would never happen in such a short time period. Why would Rich have believed that?â€￾

USA320pilot comments: During the Representation election campaign USAPA mailed out campaign material and posted on the earlier version of their website they could obtain a new contract in 3 months because seniority is negotiable as part of a contract. And, Stephen Bradford personally told me this. Rich only repeated what USAPA said.

captainJack said: “Where did USAPA promise a "contract" in three months? I guess I missed those little gems. Could you point that out to me? I, as well as you, have the experience to say that would never happen in such a short time period. Why would Rich have believed that?â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: USAPA created a DOH list and provided it to the Company. However, according to HP-FA who attended the Addington trial and some of the hearings, “(US Airways attorney Robert) Siegel went on to state that the Company's position was that it wanted a single CBA and that it wanted to avoid labor unrest. Also, he stated that the Company accepts the Nicolau seniority list as being the seniority list for any negotiations.â€￾

captainJack said: “'snoop pretty much deconstructed the FPL canard. Perhaps you should talk with him.â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: The BPR created a Uniform Operating Manual (UOM) that is not available to the pilot group and is not on the website. The BPR held two meetings where they changed the UOM to provide them self bonus pay not available to members, which might be a violation of DOL law. The BPR will pay the Officers 85 hours on the highest piece of equipment they can hold as a Reserve and a stipend of $1,000 to $1,500. And, last week they went and passed another UOM change authorizing the lease of new vehicles for USAPA officials’ personal use. The pilot group was not briefed on this before the UOM changes, the pilot group did not vote on this, and this too could be a violation of federal law.

captainJack said: “I am of the opinion now that any west dude flying with me had better be good. Damn good. I've got the NYT on speed dial and anymore poop from this pathetic excuse for an airline will get a call. I hear US is pretty good at damage control. I would really like to test that.â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: If you hate US Airways so much and you believe the Company is “pathetic excuse for an airlineâ€￾ why don’t you retire or resign? Why work for a company you dislike. And, if you’re threatening to do damage to the company by having “NYT on speed dialâ€￾ why don’t you leave the company?

Now back to my questions. What’s your opinion of Rich Altar’s comments that:

1. USAPA “promised transparency and an organization based on democratic principles, yet you vote behind closed doors and give yourselves pay raises knowing you have deceitfully prevented any recall actions from being proffered.â€￾

2. I, along with other members of the previous R & I Committee offered to write a differing view that would have given all pilots the entire story before they committed to this waste of hard earned money. USAPA refused to publish our side of the story."

3. Things are actually worse now than they have ever been. The company gives USAPA leadership no respect or credibility. That has lead to real pain and suffering by many pilots and their families. That wouldn't have happened under the previous bargaining agent.

captainJack, I answered each of your questions. Can you provide me specific information on your comment the Herndon pay raises and tell me what you think about Rich’s 3 comments I listed above in bold print?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

P.S. Does it make you feel important to insult others with comments like "take your weak spine somewhere else"?

P.S.S. By the way...you asked for a reference on where the company said they would only accept the Nicolau Award and I gave it to you. According to HP_FA US Airways' attorney told Judge Wake "the Company's position was that it wanted a single CBA and that it wanted to avoid labor unrest. Also, he stated that the Company accepts the Nicolau seniority list as being the seniority list for any negotiations.â€￾

 

[cleardirect]

Saying Url are available and actually making them available are two different things. Your reluctance is telling of a liar. Try to change that.

Doug Parker's letter has been posted on this forum before. The west pilots received it, did the east not get it? Do your own research.

The url is the usapa web site. legal library. Transcripts available. Look it up your self. Calling someone a liar because they chose not to do your research for you is weak.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Barrister,

Barrister said: “USAPA is doing exactly what the VAST MAJORITY of pilots want them to do.â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: Barrister, more than 1,100 East pilots are USAPA Non-members, Objectors, or Challengers. And, about 1,700 West pilots clearly do not support USAPA. Therefore, more than 50% of the US Airways pilots do not support the union.

In his Findings of Fact Judge Wake said, “A jury has already found that USAPA breached its duty of fair representation with respect to the West Pilots. In short, USAPA violated the duty because it cast aside the result of an internal seniority arbitration solely to benefit East Pilots at the expense of West Pilots. USAPA failed to prove that any legitimate union objective motivated its acts."

Barrister, there are more than 50% of the US Airways pilots who do not support USAPA, which is why there is a group of East and West pilots working together to have a Representation election this spring that is likely to kick USAPA off of the property where the majority will win the upcoming election.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[USA320Pilot]

captainjack,

captainjack asked: “Where did USAPA promise a "contract" in three months? I guess I missed those little gems. Could you point that out to me? I, as well as you, have the experience to say that would never happen in such a short time period. Why would Rich have believed that?â€￾

USA320pilot commented: During the Representation election campaign USAPA mailed out campaign material and posted on the earlier version of their website they could obtain a new contract in 3 months because seniority is negotiable as part of a contract. And, Stephen Bradford personally told me this. Rich only repeated what USAPA said.

USA320Pilot adds another point: captainjack, I forgot to add that in Judge Wake’s Findings of Fact order Judge Wake said, “Before certification, USAPA repeatedly asserted that a contract was likely to be presented for ratification soon.â€￾ This information will be provided to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals by Judge Wake.

captainjack, I believe you owe Rich Altar an apology because not only did Rich hear it from USAPA officials, but he heard it from Judge Wake too.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[ableoneable]

Um, the letter is addressed to the President and the BPR.

What, exactly, leads you to believe this letter was to "all USAir pilots"?

It reads like a resignation letter, something not usually for public consumption. Typical Rich, trying to convince himself of something by writing a letter.

At the bottom of the letter you will see that the author CC'd all the pilots of USAirways.

 

[cleardirect]

Yes, question: why would everybody be happy? I would think the West pilots may have something to worry about. Is that not true? USAPA won an expedited appeal from the 9th, yes? How is that cause for happiness for the West ?

If you have not seen the order here it is.

Appellant's unopposed motion for expedition is granted.

The opening brief is due September 25, 2009; the answering brief is due October 26, 2009; and the optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the answering brief.

This case shall be placed on the December 2009 calendar.

It clearly says that this is unopposed. So just because usapa asked for expedited hearing I would not consider it a win. Both sides agreed. So yes the west is happy with the quickness because it should end this faster.

Yes, question: you left out about the written arguments that will be submitted before the oral arguments. It would be in those written briefs that USAPA will lay out most of its appeal. Is that true?

HP-FA probably left out the written part because that is the main and sometimes only part of the apeal. It goes without says. The schedule is listed here. If you notice it does not give a date for oral arguments. There may not be any. It is not certain the court will hear any. Besides, what is Seham going to tell three judge in 15 minutes that they don't all ready know?

Other than a pay day from Seham and a mark on his resume for arguing in the ninth. What will it accomplish?

Another question: wasn't it you and a number of West pilots who thought USAPA's appeal would take at least 14 months to 2 years to be heard?

That is the median time listed by the court of appeals web site. It the court had rejected the expedited hearing that is how long it could have taken. So yes it is a good thing that the court will hear this quick. The sooner we can put this behind us.

It seems to me that the West has already decided what the outcome will be. They can whistle past all the graveyards in PHX but that won't get them an answer any sooner than the court of appeals ruling. Isn't that true?

Given the odds of winning an appeal and especially on this case. Yes the west is very confident in the outcome.

It also seems to me that the jury in the DFR case practiced jury nullification much like in the OJ trial although I don't know what the proper term is for this type of thing in a civil trial. Perhaps you know? As I recall, they deliberated only 3 hours, is that true? And that after such a complicated case for a jury of "plain citizens"? That is certainly true.

Yes it was three hours to decide. But it was eight days of testimony. Sitting through the entire trial everything and I mean everything was gone over repeatedly. By the end of the trial the decisions was not complicated at all. The jury understood quite clearly what the facts of this are.