ALPA/TWA Duty of Fair Representation Award

[B6Driver]

Oh my God!

ALPA will prevail in an appeal on that matter, if it ever gets to that. ALPA did NOT fail the TWA pilots. The APA screwed over the TWA pilots, and the aftermath of 9/11 rubbed salt in the wounds. But ALPA did nothing that they are alleged to have done.

But as to your question of what should happen in the event that a union actually does violate its duty of fair representation, the members should seek to recall the officers who took part and take action to ensure that it doesn't happen again. Stealing money from fellow members is not a suitable solution, however.

What a clueless tool.

 

[flyboyike]

ALPA will prevail in an appeal on that matter, if it ever gets to that. ALPA did NOT fail the TWA pilots. The APA screwed over the TWA pilots, and the aftermath of 9/11 rubbed salt in the wounds. But ALPA did nothing that they are alleged to have done.

I think you actually believe that.

 

[matchthehatch]

This the problem with any lawsuit against a union. You're never suing some nebulous entity, you're suing your fellow pilots and taking money out of their pockets. Even if you don't win (and I don't think the TWA pilots ultimately will), you still wasted incredible amounts of your fellow pilots' money on the defense that typically costs millions of dollars for a long-term suit. Where is the honor in taking money out of your union brother's pockets?

So if we use this argument and apply it to other cases, then a company shouldn't be held liable for dumping toxic chemicals into a river, because employees will be financially harmed when the company declares bankruptcy. Or a father who, while drunk, plows his car into a group of spectators, should not be sentenced to prison, because he will not be able to provide for his family while incarcerated.

Sorry man, but your argument is terrible.

 

[ironspud]

It's not stealing if the courts rule for the plaintiffs. And BTW, Woerth wasn't solely responsible for ALPA's actions -- he had support from MECs.

Especially the DAL MEC.

 

[SWA Bubba]

ALPA will prevail in an appeal on that matter, if it ever gets to that. ALPA did NOT fail the TWA pilots. The APA screwed over the TWA pilots, and the aftermath of 9/11 rubbed salt in the wounds. But ALPA did nothing that they are alleged to have done.

But as to your question of what should happen in the event that a union actually does violate its duty of fair representation, the members should seek to recall the officers who took part and take action to ensure that it doesn't happen again. Stealing money from fellow members is not a suitable solution, however.

You dodged the question. OK, it's obvious that YOU believe (or at the very least, you want to believe) that they didn't do anything wrong. As it turns our, and unfortunately for ALPA, the jury found otherwise. The term you should have used above is not "alleged to have done," but rather "judged by a court to have done."

However, for the sake of argument, if they DID fail their DFR, why do you believe that the harmed membbers shouldn't be made whole? Okay, recall the offending officers, but you think it's not "fair" to redress their wrongs? Really? So if your brokerage agent cheats you out of your retirement money, the firm should fire him, but NOT recompense you because it might take money from their shareholders or other clients? Do you really believe that? That seems to be what you're saying.

And as I'm sure you know, you can appeal a jury verdict based on technical issues, legal issues, or new information; however you cannot appeal their verdict simply on the grounds that you don't like it. You have to have a legal reason. You can stall (which seems to be ALPA's current strategy), but that falls under the category of legal manipulation, not justice. A good union brother like yourself should know better.

Like I said, this is not on individual ALPA members, but rather on their leadership at that time. They're gone from those positions, but according to they eyes of the law, they did wrong in ALPA's name. That makes ALPA responsible. And the people that they wronged have a right to have that wrong addressed. Sorry that's inconvenient for you.

Bubba

 

[Bringupthebird]

I think it's been settled in court (an apparently in most of the principals' minds) that ALPA did indeed not only fail, but intentionally so, in their DFR by trying to sell out the TWA pilots in return for trying to suck up to APA for political purposes.

As they later did against the AWA pilots and the Nicolau award.

 

[PCL_128]

The term you should have used above is not "alleged to have done," but rather "judged by a court to have done."

This process isn't over. Very far from it. We still haven't even gone to the penalty phase, and appeals can't even be considered until after that. Until the appeals are done, this case is still far from determined.

However, for the sake of argument, if they DID fail their DFR, why do you believe that the harmed membbers shouldn't be made whole? Okay, recall the offending officers, but you think it's not "fair" to redress their wrongs? Really? So if your brokerage agent cheats you out of your retirement money, the firm should fire him, but NOT recompense you because it might take money from their shareholders or other clients? Do you really believe that? That seems to be what you're saying.

When you sue your insurance company, you aren't suing your union brothers and sisters. That should mean something. Sorry, but I don't feel it's right to take money out of your fellow union members' pockets.

And as I'm sure you know, you can appeal a jury verdict based on technical issues, legal issues, or new information; however you cannot appeal their verdict simply on the grounds that you don't like it.

Actually, you can. It's called a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. It's used when a jury comes to a decision that is clearly so far outside of the law that a judge can overturn their decision.

You have to have a legal reason. You can stall (which seems to be ALPA's current strategy), but that falls under the category of legal manipulation, not justice. A good union brother like yourself should know better.

There are plenty of reasons to appeal this case, and every reason to believe that the appeals will be successful. It's not "stalling" to use the appeals process.

 

[glasspilot1]

They deserve some kind of compensation, but I am not sure it should come from ALPA. The problem is that the money will come from other pilots. Most of the pilots that had nothing to do with neither the decision making process nor the guidence to direct it..... The people who were the ALPA decision makers of the day are no longer there. All those people are gone with their millions of dollars, and the membership and current leadership will be forced to deal with the burden.

The lawsuit needs to be against the ALPA membership of the day and not against the organization. Dwayne Worth as I recall.

It's not our fault the courts take this long. The lawsuit was first filed in 2002, over 10 years ago! We won the DFR suit in July 2011. NOW we're waiting on a SEPARATE (yes, I'm yelling) damages suit. By the time the damages are determined it'll be, what, 12 or 13+ years?

I'm sorry the court system can take so absolutely, ridiculously long to play out. We're not going to lay down "so as not to hurt brother pilots", it's not the way it works!

 

[redflyer65]

The judge could have overturned it already. He hasn't. He's letting it go forward. There is a TON of weight when a jury convicts. Especially 12-0. They've heard all the evidence and ruled. Very, very rarely will any verdict of this magnatude get completely overturned.

My prediction? The money judgement (whatever that might be), could be reduced somewhat, but that's probably it. So from the TWA side, you want a huge initial judgement, like 40 million. Then ALPA might get it down to 20 million and done deal. Something along those lines. I just made up the dollar amounts as an example.

 

[PCL_128]

The judge could have overturned it already. He hasn't. He's letting it go forward. There is a TON of weight when a jury convicts. Especially 12-0. They've heard all the evidence and ruled. Very, very rarely will any verdict of this magnatude get completely overturned.

Verdicts like this get overturned all the time. A DFR case is incredibly technical, and an appeals panel is likely to see things quite differently than a jury of 12 laymen was. And that's assuming that the second jury even awards them any money in the first place.

 

[ultrarunner]

I guess ALPA was banking on sympathy in-as-much as they chose a jury-trial...ALPA likely conceded they would have lost a bench-trial...

 

[redflyer65]

Verdicts like this get overturned all the time. A DFR case is incredibly technical, and an appeals panel is likely to see things quite differently than a jury of 12 laymen was. And that's assuming that the second jury even awards them any money in the first place.

And why didn't the bench judge overturn it already? He saw all the same evidence.

 

[Turtle21]

Verdicts like this get overturned all the time. A DFR case is incredibly technical, and an appeals panel is likely to see things quite differently than a jury of 12 laymen was. And that's assuming that the second jury even awards them any money in the first place.

I agree. Litigation that hopes to win 100s of millions of dollars is always a tedious, incredibly technical, and risky venture... especially DFR. The chances of ever getting better than 5 cents of the dollar, in any DFR, is remote. Its just the way it is. Courts have an extraordinary reluctance to interfere with union operations and afford them a wide range of reasonableness in their activities.

Not that folks shouldn't sue, as long as they understand the risks, and as long as they realize that time will surely and steadily erode the resolve of many within their class. Each person has to weigh for themselves the risk involved in each new opportunity to fund the lawyers.

 

[igneousy2]

Lee Moak says no members are going to be assessed...so it must be true!

What do you expect him to say? If he said, "hey, this might bankrupt ALPA" it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, as every major pilot group runs for the doors.

As far as the comment that APA is who screwed the TWA pilots, that may be true in a philosophical sense but absolutely not in a legal sense. APA had no legal duty to the TWA pilots.

When you belong to a union, you are together for better or worse. You reap the benefits together (gotta love those insurance discounts!) and you pay together.

 

[Turtle21]

Lee Moak says no members are going to be assessed...so it must be true!

What do you expect him to say? If he said, "hey, this might bankrupt ALPA" it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, as every major pilot group runs for the doors.

As far as the comment that APA is who screwed the TWA pilots, that may be true in a philosophical sense but absolutely not in a legal sense. APA had no legal duty to the TWA pilots.

When you belong to a union, you are together for better or worse. You reap the benefits together (gotta love those insurance discounts!) and you pay together.

Reminds me of Baghdad Bob!