Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How do you even argue with someone so stupid. Mainline 170, oh give me a break.
Well, I didn't/don't work there, but have a few friends that did; those 170s were on the "US Airways" certificate, and the pilots received paychecks that said "US Airways" on them. So, what would you call it??
It is very, Very clear from looking at the situation that ALPA (and the Co. for that matter), really, really 'screwed the pooch' on that whole deal. And, that is why the guys that are probably going to win their lawsuit against ALPA. Why do you think that ALPA already offered to 'settle' the suit, but only offered a token amount of like $1mil. Even more, I guess the scary thing for the AW pilots, is that the judge may very well end up 'throwing out' that seniority integration award.
For what its worth.
DA
That's not the whole story. In any case, arbitrator Nicolau was presented with the case and he did rule on it. Here's what he wrote of the CEL pilots:Well, I didn't/don't work there, but have a few friends that did; those 170s were on the "US Airways" certificate, and the pilots received paychecks that said "US Airways" on them. So, what would you call it??
Our reps told us this was an urban legend; that there was no settlement offer. I guess I don't know for sure. My guess is that as usual, the suit will take many years before resolution.Why do you think that ALPA already offered to 'settle' the suit, but only offered a token amount of like $1mil.
That's not the whole story. In any case, arbitrator Nicolau was presented with the case and he did rule on it. Here's what he wrote of the CEL pilots:
Before turning to the building blocks of our decision and the reasons for those choices, a preliminary matter needs to be
addressed. That is the question of the CEL pilots. Some 105 such pilots (4993-5098) appear on the US Airways May 19, 2005 Certified Seniority List. However, none had flown for the mainline; all were pilots at Mid-Atlantic Airways, a regional carrier designed to be a USAirways wholly-owned subsidiary, but actually flown at all times duringits short existence on the mainline's operating certificate as a division of US Airways.
In other words, he was well aware that MDA was a "division" of USAIRways yet it wasn't mainline.Our reps told us this was an urban legend; that there was no settlement offer. I guess I don't know for sure. My guess is that as usual, the suit will take many years before resolution.
That's impressive. You're post didn't have one accurate thing in it. I guess that's what second hand hearsay get's you.
That's not the whole story. In any case, arbitrator Nicolau was presented with the case and he did rule on it. Here's what he wrote of the CEL pilots:
Before turning to the building blocks of our decision and the reasons for those choices, a preliminary matter needs to be
addressed. That is the question of the CEL pilots. Some 105 such pilots (4993-5098) appear on the US Airways May 19, 2005 Certified Seniority List. However, none had flown for the mainline; all were pilots at Mid-Atlantic Airways, a regional carrier designed to be a USAirways wholly-owned subsidiary, but actually flown at all times duringits short existence on the mainline's operating certificate as a division of US Airways.
In other words, he was well aware that MDA was a "division" of USAIRways yet it wasn't mainline.[/quote]
Maybe you can clarify this for me, what does this mean?? "a divison of US Airways"?? So, the pilots who work for the "TED division" of United are NOT United pilots, the pilots who worked for the "MetroJet division" of US Airways were NOT US Air pilots, the pilot who worked for the "Cal-Lite division" of CAL were NOT CAL pilots??? Well, I could go on and on, but maybe you should just answer this question; was there any such company as "MDA"??? If this answer is, NO, then clearly is was all, "US Airways" ergo, they all would be "US Airways pilots" And, if they win their suit, in court, then it would appear that the arbitrator was 'incorrect' in his assessment, which is a possibility.
Again, don't have a dog in this fight, and that is why, again, I don't post here very often, but did read what you stated, heard the 'whole story' and do believe that those guys with the lawsuit will probably win. As I said, it is clear that ALPA and the Co. 'screwed up' on this one, and that is why they will win.
For what its worth.
DA
P.S. If it was make you feel better, this is the last thing that I will say on this matter, as I will Not argue with morons. As I said earlier, I will simply come back on here, after they win their suit, and just say; "I told you so."
That's not the whole story. In any case, arbitrator Nicolau was presented with the case and he did rule on it. Here's what he wrote of the CEL pilots:
Before turning to the building blocks of our decision and the reasons for those choices, a preliminary matter needs to be
addressed. That is the question of the CEL pilots. Some 105 such pilots (4993-5098) appear on the US Airways May 19, 2005 Certified Seniority List. However, none had flown for the mainline; all were pilots at Mid-Atlantic Airways, a regional carrier designed to be a USAirways wholly-owned subsidiary, but actually flown at all times duringits short existence on the mainline's operating certificate as a division of US Airways.
In other words, he was well aware that MDA was a "division" of USAIRways yet it wasn't mainline.[/quote]
Maybe you can clarify this for me, what does this mean?? "a divison of US Airways"?? So, the pilots who work for the "TED division" of United are NOT United pilots, the pilots who worked for the "MetroJet division" of US Airways were NOT US Air pilots, the pilot who worked for the "Cal-Lite division" of CAL were NOT CAL pilots??? Well, I could go on and on, but maybe you should just answer this question; was there any such company as "MDA"??? If this answer is, NO, then clearly is was all, "US Airways" ergo, they all would be "US Airways pilots" And, if they win their suit, in court, then it would appear that the arbitrator was 'incorrect' in his assessment, which is a possibility.
Again, don't have a dog in this fight, and that is why, again, I don't post here very often, but did read what you stated, heard the 'whole story' and do believe that those guys with the lawsuit will probably win. As I said, it is clear that ALPA and the Co. 'screwed up' on this one, and that is why they will win.
For what its worth.
DA
P.S. If it was make you feel better, this is the last thing that I will say on this matter, as I will Not argue with morons. As I said earlier, I will simply come back on here, after they win their suit, and just say; "I told you so."
Excellent we'll never have to hear from you again.
Look, there's no doubt it was an irregular, unprecedented situation. MDA differed from Ted, Song, and Metrojet, and Cal Lite because pilots were not allowed to inter-bid to the real mainline.Maybe you can clarify this for me, what does this mean?? "a divison of US Airways"??
Then why didn't they sue Management?