US Pilots Thread 11/24-12/1-Discuss Pilot Labor Issues Here

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Ask yourself this question. IF the west wins the suit that is presently before Judge Wake will you support USAPA's plan to appeal? If you answer in the affirmative then you know what my "beef" is brother...

Why not be a man and admit USAPA is spinning the sh*t out of this?

Ah let them huff and puff and spin it. Judge Wake has alot more in common with Judge Reidinger and George Nicolau than John Prater and Doug Parker. In other words, their huffing and puffing likely won't get them nearly as far, know what I mean?

 

[UtterlyUdder]

Where was I talking about a merger? I was talking about a scenario where different parts of US would be sold to two or more other carriers. It could even be a scenario where part of US was sold to another carrier. In such a case, you and others have been pretty clear - you'd have new hire status at the acquiring carrier if you elected to go with the portion(s) being sold. I suspect that the acquiring carrier's pilots would be glad that you cleared up that "difference of opinion about hire date"...

Jim

Oh there you go again BoeingBoy but Happy Thanksgiving to you just the same.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Ask yourself this question. IF the west wins the suit that is presently before Judge Wake will you support USAPA's plan to appeal? If you answer in the affirmative then you know what my "beef" is brother...

Why not be a man and admit USAPA is spinning the sh*t out of this?

I expect USAPA to take it to the LAST gavel. Whether USAPA spins it (just as the west is doing) or not makes no difference to the outcome.

If you're getting your knickers in a knot over what USAPA says, that is your problem and ONLY YOUR problem. You can, assuming you are a member in good standing, certainly voice your opinion to USAPA. If you're not a member, then I guess you and I will just have to put up with the rhetoric from both sides until the courts decide.

Fair enough? (If not, talk to the hand because the ear's not listening.)

 

[GuntherA320]

Ask yourself this question. IF the west wins the suit that is presently before Judge Wake will you support USAPA's plan to appeal? If you answer in the affirmative then you know what my "beef" is brother...

Why not be a man and admit USAPA is spinning the sh*t out of this?

Tiger,

Ask yourself this question, IF the west wins this suit (many in the west think it has already been won. I say it is 50/50 and there could be any number possible comprimises by the judge in between our two positions.) what do you think the chances are that USAPA will appeal? I would say 90% of east pilots would support an appeal if it came down to that. But again....who knows what the actual decision will be. No one here knows. From past experience I can tell you that the likelyhood of this thing being over in March or April is highly unlikely from either side. If the west loses, then I wouldn't be suprised if they appeal. I am sorry you are getting furloughed. Many of us have been there. I hope circumstances change and you get back soon. However, with the state of the economy I would not be surprised if we don't have more cutbacks. I hope you are not pinning your hopes on return to this lawsuit. I would put the odds of this thing being over in the spring to less than 5%. The odds of it taking 4 or 5 years? Probably 75%. Expect seperate ops and status quo for quite some time. I'm not trying to be a %$&hole here. I'm just being a realist. You can get mad but it won't do you any good. You can prepare for the future or you can just sit back and wait. I am doing my best to aquire every type rating we have here in case the worst happens. And by worst, I don't mean the east loses the lawsuit. I hope you are preparing yourself for the same. This may not even be a place you will want to come back to. Again, best of luck to you. I do mean that in all sincerity.

Gunther (or Tucson as SNN likes to call me)

 

[BoeingBoy]

Federal law is pretty specific on how acquisitions are handled when it comes to merging work groups. Did you miss that last year? Things like Allegheny-Mohawk and FEDERAL arbitration.

Absolutely correct, and I assume that during the negotiation phase specified by the law any East pilots that would go with assets purchased would insist on their date of hire at the acquiring entity be the date the transfer of assets/pilots occurred. Right?

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Happy Thanksgiving to you just the same.

The same to you and yours. Be sure to save enough turkey for sandwiches - I like them better than the turkey on T-giving day.

Jim

 

[Freighterguynow]

Tiger,
However, with the state of the economy I would not be surprised if we don't have more cutbacks.

Home prices in the 10-city index have fallen for 26 consecutive months.

In the weakest market, Phoenix, the 12-month loss came to 31.9%. Las Vegas prices plummeted 31.3% and San Francisco recorded a 29.5% decline.

The best performing markets, Dallas and Charlotte, N.C., still posted drops - 2.7% in Dallas and 3.5% in Charlotte.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/25/real_estat...sion=2008112515

 

[cleardirect]

Tiger,

Ask yourself this question, IF the west wins this suit (many in the west think it has already been won. I say it is 50/50 and there could be any number possible comprimises by the judge in between our two positions.) what do you think the chances are that USAPA will appeal? I would say 90% of east pilots would support an appeal if it came down to that. But again....who knows what the actual decision will be. No one here knows. From past experience I can tell you that the likelyhood of this thing being over in March or April is highly unlikely from either side. If the west loses, then I wouldn't be suprised if they appeal. I am sorry you are getting furloughed. Many of us have been there. I hope circumstances change and you get back soon. However, with the state of the economy I would not be surprised if we don't have more cutbacks. I hope you are not pinning your hopes on return to this lawsuit. I would put the odds of this thing being over in the spring to less than 5%. The odds of it taking 4 or 5 years? Probably 75%. Expect seperate ops and status quo for quite some time. I'm not trying to be a %$&hole here. I'm just being a realist. You can get mad but it won't do you any good. You can prepare for the future or you can just sit back and wait. I am doing my best to aquire every type rating we have here in case the worst happens. And by worst, I don't mean the east loses the lawsuit. I hope you are preparing yourself for the same. This may not even be a place you will want to come back to. Again, best of luck to you. I do mean that in all sincerity.

Gunther (or Tucson as SNN likes to call me)

Gunther,

Why do you think that this trial is going to take 4-5 years?

ACCELERATED TRIAL ON PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND LIABILITY FOR
DAMAGES; BIFURCATION OF TRIAL ON AMOUNT OF DAMAGES.

Trial on the claim for permanent injunction and liability for damages is accelerated and will be set no later than February 17, 2009. Trial on the amount of damages is bifurcated and will be scheduled, if necessary, after ruling on the trial on permanent injunction and liability for damages. No dispositive motions will be allowed, as the parties have already engaged in extensive pre-trial motion practice and the urgency of the case does not permit time for another round of substantive motions before the claim for permanent injunction must be decided.

This thing will be at trial on or before February 17, 2009. If you read the scheduling order. This judge is not messing around. The statement below about the expert witnesses. No delay allowed. Normally you would be correct that trails take a long time. Not this one. I was a the hearing in October. Judge Wake is not messing around.

3 No expert witness not timely disclosed will be permitted to testify unless the party offering such witness demonstrates: (a) that the necessity of such expert witness could not have been reasonably anticipated at the time of the deadline for disclosing such expert witness; (B) the Court and opposing counsel or unrepresented party were promptly notified upon discovery of such expert witness; and © that such expert witness was promptly proffered for deposition. See Wong v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 2004 WL 1837752, 379 F.3d 1097, 1103 (9th Cir. August 18, 2004).

One more thing, you might go broke playing odds maker in LAS. Take a look at the latest USAPA update and compare it to the actual judge’s order. It was available on the USAPA web site.

USAPA update Nov 26
The “procedural†objection is based on the allegation that USAPA arbitrarily declined to negotiate the implementation of the Nicolau List solely for the sake of political expediency. Of concern is Judge Wake’s comment that USAPA’s position "flies against the headwind of cases from other circuits". In support of this preliminary conclusion, he cites four cases from two circuits:

Judge Wake's order
As a general proposition, the seniority scheme under the Nicolau Award is not the only permissible way to resolve post-merger seniority issues within unions. For instance, there is nothing per se unacceptable about a seniority agreement based on the date of hire. Laturner, 501 F.2d at 599; Rakestraw v. United Airlines, Inc., 981 F.2d 1524, 1533 (7th Cir. 1992). USAPA refers repeatedly to these principles at their highest level of generality. The problem is, though the benefit of the Nicolau Award is surely what motivates the West Pilots, their legal objection to USAPA’s date-of-hire seniority policy is not directly substantive, but rather procedural. The alleged breach of the duty stems from the bad faith manner of USAPA’s determined
attempts to evade the Award. Irrespective of whether seniority rights “vest†in a proprietary sense, a union may not arbitrarily abridge those rights after a merger solely for the sake of political expediency. Barton Brands, Ltd. v. NLRB, 529 F.2d 793, 800 (7th Cir. 1976); see also Rakestraw, 981 F.2d at 1531.

The Ninth Circuit has not dealt directly with this fact situation, but the union’s position flies against the headwind of cases from other circuits. The D.C. Circuit has held that a union breaches its duty of fair representation when it “arbitrarily adopt and announce a bargaining policy on seniority merger motivated only by a desire to win the votes of a majority of the employees.†Truck Drivers & Helpers, Local Union 568 v. NLRB, 379 F.2d 137, 145 (D.C. Cir. 1967).

This statement comes a little further down the page. Quite clearly the judge does not believe USAPA’s argument. I find it hard to understand why Seham felt the need to rehash a legal argument in an update. The same legal argument that the judge found lacking.

The Rakestraw decision contains only one citation of Air Wisconsin, and that citation is favorable. Although Rakestraw reaffirms the principle that a union may change its bargaining position and adopt a date-of-hire policy, it nowhere disavows Judge Posner’s dictum. Rakestraw does not permit a union to formulate its policy in an improper manner. Rakestraw, 981 F.2d at 1535 (“The change must rationally promote the aggregate welfare of employees in the bargaining unit.â€). Like many other cases USAPA cites on fair representation, Rakestraw will not bear the weight USAPA places upon it.

USAPA also asserted at oral argument that the union majority’s right to approve any new collective bargaining agreement subjected the Nicolau Award to a “political veto.â€2 This argument begs the question. In essence, USAPA argues that it can never be a breach of the duty of fair representation for the majority to seize its own interest. “With respect, this is a very poor argument. Minority rights imply a limitation on rights of the majority . . . .†Air Wisconsin, 909 F.2d at 216. The union majority may not discriminate against certain members without a rational basis for doing so, grounded in the aggregate welfare of its employees.

One last item. I think that this sums up the judges attitude towards USAPA’s argument that DOH is a “core union principleâ€. This exchange comes from the transcripts at the hearing.

MR. SEHAM: If you look at every other major employee group on this property, the dispatchers, the flight attendants, the mechanics, the stock employees, they are all going through a
pure date of hire.

THE COURT: That's irrelevant. I mean, things are different from pilots than other groups.

THE COURT: Isn't the proof of the futility what I just received last night, which is USAPA's September 30 proposed seniority list, which is a 100 percent victory for the East Pilots and a 100 percent defeat for the West Pilots? What more futility do you need than that proof that they have been negotiating as they campaigned to defeat the ALPA merger policy as implemented and have a different priority system that entirely favors the East Pilot to the complete detriment of the West Pilots?

Your call what you read and what you believe. But read everything in context and completely. Come to your own conclusion.

 

[jetjok1]

It's "time out". I would like to take this opportunity to wish us ALL, East and West, a Happy and blessed Thanksgiving.

We need to take "time out" to be thankful for what we have. Enjoy your day with your loved ones or significant others.


Jetjok

 

[Tiger 1050]

It's "time out". I would like to take this opportunity to wish us ALL, East and West, a Happy and blessed Thanksgiving.

We need to take "time out" to be thankful for what we have. Enjoy your day with your loved ones or significant others.


Jetjok

Thanks Jet. Happy Thanksgiving everyone...

 

[tazz]

What's your beef? You're paying lawyers so that the courts will decide. We're good with that. Until the last gavel comes down, anything you say, or I say, or USAPA says, or AOL says, or AWAPPA says, or Seham says is blowing smoke anyway. Why get your knickers in such a knot over it?

Yeah, you're good with that..... Unless a decision comes down contrary to your position.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Absolutely correct, and I assume that during the negotiation phase specified by the law....

The more I thought about the law mandating protections in labor integrations, the greater the doubt that it applies in fragmentation situations. So I looked it up and it only applies if there is a transfer of 50% or more of the equity or assets (by value). So if, for example, US sold the Shuttle off to another carrier the federal law with it's protections wouldn't apply to any employees that went with the shuttle.

It is possible to envision a situation wherein 2 or more other carriers bought pieces of US and none of the transactions triggered the federal law.

Jim

 

[GuntherA320]

Gunther,

Why do you think that this trial is going to take 4-5 years?



This thing will be at trial on or before February 17, 2009. If you read the scheduling order. This judge is not messing around. The statement below about the expert witnesses. No delay allowed. Normally you would be correct that trails take a long time. Not this one. I was a the hearing in October. Judge Wake is not messing around.

Clear,

Nowhere in my message did i say the "trial" was going to take 4 or 5 years. I believe you have misread what I said. Read it again. This trial will probably be over by summer. Who know's how it is going to come out. I know you think you have your hometown judge and you can already see the outcome. Fact is that no one here knows what will transpire between now and then. No one here knows what the outcome will be. However with that being said. I fully expect whatever the outcome either way that this will probably continue on to the 9th Circuit Court no matter which side "wins". (Personally i don't think either side will win) Once that happens do you expect another expidited trial? It may go all the way to the Supreme Court. Both sides are so heavily entrenched that I expect all avenues to be exhausted before this is over. That will more than likely take 4 or 5 years and many millions of dollars.(My 75% prediction) That is a realistic expectation in my opinion. Hell this company may be out of business before this is over. I know you expect this to be over come Feb 17th. I wouldn't count on it no matter which side is percieved to come out on top. Again, not being an %$#hole, just realistic.

Gunther

 

[GuntherA320]

Clear,

I've been thinking about this while digesting my second helping of turkey for the day. Honestly, what do you think the best case senario for the west would be as far as the outcome of this trial with Judge Wake? Best case in my opinion for you guys is that the judge issues an order for the Nicolau list to be included in any contract negotiations with no possiblity of appeal (He can't force the company to combine operations). It is possible he could issue damages payable to the west pilots. However, you will be paying dues by then and while your dues are for mx of the contract, that pretty much offsets any damages due to you. Even if you bankrupt the union, what does that get you? ALPA won't be back. There would be a new union and we would still have a contract to negotiate. The judge has already agreed that seperate ops are allowed, as he found in favor of the company when it came to furloughs. Until there is a contract negotiated, there will be no "effective" combined seniority list. Expect the company to stonewall negotiations (which they are already doing) Expect them to wait until the east can go section 6. Expect that to take an additional 18 to 24 months. That is a best case senario in my opinion. But hey....you get your Nicolau.....be it 4 or 5 years down the road. Again, I'm not trying to antagonize anyone. This is just what I see happening as a best case senario for the west.

Gunther

P.S. After writing this I read the USAPA Watch update. I think this clip echo's my sentiment. Here is the exerpt at the end of the update:

"Appeals to the Ninth Circuit can take years. If US Airways is fortunate enough to survive the latest recession, it isnt likely that Mr. Parker is going to wait for the Ninth Circuit to rule before moving forward with his business plans. The time for a more rational approach is long overdue. There must be a better way."

 

[cleardirect]

Gunther

I agree. Your scenario is a distinct possibility. Bottom line the reason that we are in court is to force USAPA to live up to the agreement that the east pilots made. I understand the argument that it was not USAPA. I believe the judge sees through that. Just like when John Prater failed to submit the list in a reasonable time to the company. The west has seen the course of action required to deal with the east. We have to cut off all possible avenues in order implement the Nicolau.

I am not saying that the Nicolau is the holy grail of seniority lists. We are not happy with it. Could it have been different? Sure. But it was not, that is the deal that was made. We only want what we agreed to.

If the judge agrees with our side and tells the union and the company that the Nicolau will be the only seniority list used we have moved forward. If you watch the crew news from PHX. Listen to Parker carefully. Without saying it he said that he is waiting for a judge to tell him what to do.

I think once the east understands that the Nicolau will be in any contract brought we can now begin to work on the rest of the contract. If, once the Nicolau is in place the west will join and become part of USAPA, just like they say they want. But currently our interests are not being represented. Not just the section 22 but in the rest of the contract.

As far as going to the ninth circuit appeals court. I would really hope that the leadership would think long and hard about that. Get a second opinion from a law firm without a financial interest in going to trial. Next it is my understanding that if they want to pursue an appeal. USAPA would have to put up a big money cash bond to do that. By big money I mean it could be $10’s of millions. Because the court could consider the delay of a contract a direct responsibility of USAPA‘s.

I would also guess that the company may just go ahead and negotiate a contract using the Nicolau. Otherwise is the east willing to set aside negotiations for the next 4-5 years as you say? Because if you are right the company will not sign a contract if they are waiting for an appeal. Then what happens if USAPA losses that appeal? Keep going to the supreme court? Still no contract.

We only have to wait another 16 months before another election. Four months before we can start collecting cards. That puts it right after the trial. If USAPA loses but tells the membership they have to wait for the appeal before you get a contract. Plus it will cost a couple million dollars. That might kick start the effort. I am not even talking ALPA. Any other union.

A possibility of a bankrupt union. Defiantly! I don’t know what that entails? But it would be bad. Separate ops. Without a contract your are right. What happens if the east coast economy takes a big hit and they need to downsize the east bases 15%-20% still sound like a good idea? We have all ready taken our reductions.

As far as the west paying ourselves damages. The judge could very easily order USAPA not to charge the west pilots a special assessment or force them to split off our the cost of damages in the dues. We may get a lower dues fee. There are ways to correct that.

It is a mess. Hopefully you and all the east pilots are staying informed. With all of the information available. Not just being “good union pilotsâ€￾ and listening to the union propaganda. If you have not read the judges order it is posted on the USAPA web site. Then read the latest update from USAPA. Then tell me if the USAPA leadership has a firm grasp of reality or not.

Do you really want these guys guiding this pilot group for the next 4-5 years wasting millions of dollars with no possibility of a new contract?