Former AWA Pilot writes the truth

[get2flyin]

The West pilots accepted Nic putting 517 Widebody pilots on the top of the list. Using the same logic, the RJ pilots should go on the bottom, right?

 

[FR8mastr]

It is pointless to argue this.

The only thing that is fact, is there will be no DFR until there is a contract.
Then the West will start DFR 2 and have to prove how they were harmed. (remember no harm, no DFR. IE not ripe)

End of story. Battling back and forth on these boards in a complete exercise in futility.

So at this point you would think that all pilots would want a new contract, because...

We all need a better contract.

Other than seniority we all agree we need a new contract.

The West cant sue until they have been harmed, again NOT RIPE.

 

[The Rookie]

It is pointless to argue this.

That it is.

The West and East pilots accepted the Nicolau Award when they both separately ratified the Transition Agreement. Like it or not, the Nicolau Award was the result of the application of ALPA Merger Policy.

The East led USAPA wants to change the language in the Transition Agreement and the Company is all too happy to oblige. However, it becomes a legal issue to change a three-party document with only two parties consent. The third party, the West still exists, yet no longer has it's own separate legal representation.

Eventually, after all of the wasted dollars, pent up emotions and legal rangling run it's course, the majority of the US Airways pilots will have a choice:

A joint contract with the Nicolau Award or Separate Operations under LOA 93/AWA Contract 2003

It will be up to the individual pilot to decide.

 

[TWA Dude]

The West cant sue until they have been harmed, again NOT RIPE.

You restate the obvious but then ignore the obvious: the company's suit for declaratory judgment. If all goes well it will obviate the need for a DFR 2 suit. Like Judge Wake, Judge Silver seems to see exactly what USAPA is trying to do -- and how wrong it is.

 

[FR8mastr]

You restate the obvious but then ignore the obvious: the company's suit for declaratory judgment. If all goes well it will obviate the need for a DFR 2 suit. Like Judge Wake, Judge Silver seems to see exactly what USAPA is trying to do -- and how wrong it is.

Well then I guess it's all settled then

So why are we still talking about it?

The West is so convinced that they are going to win, then what is the point of the constant " well you said, well she said, well they did this, well you did that.. Enough already

Page after freakin page of bashing everything East all the while claiming its the East pilots that are angry.

You claim to have nothing to worry about, well act like it.

 

[TWA Dude]

Well then I guess it's all settled then.

Last I checked it's still in the courts.

So why are we still talking about it?

Ask your colleague who started this thread.

The West is so convinced that they are going to win, then what is the point of the constant " well you said, well she said, well they did this, well you did that.. Enough already

We're not convinced we're going to to win, we're convinced the law is on our side. If there's justice we'll win.

Page after freakin page of bashing everything East all the while claiming its the East pilots that are angry.

Both sides are angry. The West's anger stems from the East's actions while the East's anger stems from, well, just about everything.

You claim to have nothing to worry about, well act like it.

I made no such claim. The Easties give all people with integrity something to worry about.

 

[Carl S.]

TWA Dude nails it on the head that West pilots are angry at East pilots actions towards West pilots while the East pilots are angry at everyone in the world including their fellow union brothers. When this is ever done, the West pilots will accept the outcome and move on with life, but the East pilots will bitch about the outcome forever. By the way, I was running in downtown CLT last week and saw the opening of the new Ronald McDonald house on Queens. Imagine if all this money we spent on fighting went to building this house and creating good in the world. But then again, Sehem and Cleary would be not as well off.

 

[charlie2]

Then your vision is severely myopic. A federal court jury agreed.
wrong. All I want is for binding arbitration to be binding. I didn't think that was asking for too much.

Come on TWA Dude, it's the same thing...the nic puts Dave (2 months of service) as my E190 captain and some of the captains I now fly with will be his FO too and no matter how many times you say "binding" we find that dispicable and worth fighting for. Ya we might eventually lose but we will always feel it was worth it. Time is on our side. I really believe the companies suit won't do what they want...absolve them of any future lidigation concerning a unions right to negotiate a contract so we will indeed go to DFR II and that will take years and years. I know that delays your 330 seat but you'll get there and long after I'm dead (I know you wish that was now) you will be a wide body captain.

 

[charlie2]

Oh, I get it now. This is just like USAPA's response to the Leonidas Brochure series....This is about AGE DISCRIMINATION. That's all. USAPA's argument was all about Ferguson's age and seat he could hold under the Nicolau

Based on these arguments, it sounds like you would be in favor of a DATE OF BIRTH seniority list. Right?

Sorry Charlie, but the court system will finish this. I'm gonna take a wild stab and guess that you won't like the results from that entity either. The difference is that this will be final and binding....really final and binding.

Yes DOB sounds good to me. I don't agree with DOH but I have only two choices here, that or the nic so I gotta go with USAPA on this one. Sorry Charlie...oh wait I'm Charlie.

 

[TWA Dude]

Interesting. You're arguing the fairness of the Nic and I'm arguing the integrity of living up to your obligations. I don't care if you think the nic is fair. Both sides entered arbitration expecting the other to abide by it. Grow up.

 

[charlie2]

Interesting. You're arguing the fairness of the Nic and I'm arguing the integrity of living up to your obligations. I don't care if you think the nic is fair. Both sides entered arbitration expecting the other to abide by it. Grow up.

I never would have agreed to binding arbitration (and I didn't agree to it) because the arbitrator can do whatever they want and ignore a national unions instructions and give an obvious windfall to one side. I know on this anonymous board you can say anything but I doubt you could look at a loved one and tell them that it is fair that a guy with 2 months of service should be the captain of a 16+ year guy and tell that that is not a windfallfall for Dave. You will say because I was furloughed I "brought nothing to the table". It is backwards. When my wealthy management decided to sacrifice my family so they can make the company look better for a merger than I brought everything to the table...everything...I helped make your purchase of the great US Airways possible (very sarcastic if you couldn't tell). When you stand there and try to pull it off as you guys were geniouses because "you bought USAirways" that you should have everything here I can only say you will get it all. In about 10 to 12 years. You win either way it turns out Captain.

 

[TWA Dude]

Are you still trying to argue the fairness of the Nic? That's so 2007. Welcome to 2011.

Earlier you at least tried to justify what you're trying to do to the West. Now it's back to "It's not fair and everybody owes us".

Since you're not getting it I'll repeat yet again: it's irrelevant if you think the Nic list isn't fair or didn't follow ALPA policy. He's an arbitrator and he makes those determinations, not you or I. Both sides willingly entered into binding arbitration. Deal with it and live with it. See you in Judge Silver's court.

 

[Metrojet]

Are you still trying to argue the fairness of the Nic? That's so 2007. Welcome to 2011.

Earlier you at least tried to justify what you're trying to do to the West. Now it's back to "It's not fair and everybody owes us".

Since you're not getting it I'll repeat yet again: it's irrelevant if you think the Nic list isn't fair or didn't follow ALPA policy. He's an arbitrator and he makes those determinations, not you or I. Both sides willingly entered into binding arbitration. Deal with it and live with it. See you in Judge Silver's court.

C'mon TWA Dude - your questioning why someone is "still trying to argue the fairness of Nic from 2007 - to 2011?" That's exactly what you've been doing in hundreds of threads and pretty brochure mailings from AOL!

I will disagree with you though on the DJ that the company has filed - it is just a delaying tactic for some long term strategic goal that they have - it has nothing to do with accepting a different list and a DFR II. If they wanted a new contract with certain conditions and restrictions that they felt would be voted in with a majority - it would have happened awhile ago - if a majority passes it especially in the PHX base - how could that be a DFR litigation II?

Metrojet

 

[charlie2]

Are you still trying to argue the fairness of the Nic? That's so 2007. Welcome to 2011.

Earlier you at least tried to justify what you're trying to do to the West. Now it's back to "It's not fair and everybody owes us".

Since you're not getting it I'll repeat yet again: it's irrelevant if you think the Nic list isn't fair or didn't follow ALPA policy. He's an arbitrator and he makes those determinations, not you or I. Both sides willingly entered into binding arbitration. Deal with it and live with it. See you in Judge Silver's court.

Just trying to convey to you some of the reasons for our determination and perserverance. I think you guys need to be reminded of the absurdity of your binding arbitration...it is keeping you from a decent contract. When will you see me in her court in 2012, 13? If we lose we appeal in 2014...15? In 2015 will we get to vote down (for many years) a contract containg the nic or will you guys some how get a jdge to change the RLA and have him force a contract down our throats?

 

[TWA Dude]

C'mon TWA Dude - your questioning why someone is "still trying to argue the fairness of Nic from 2007 - to 2011?" That's exactly what you've been doing in hundreds of threads and pretty brochure mailings from AOL!

I guess I'm guilty as charged, however, I hasten to add that my arguments are purely in response to Easties. I must be a closet optimist in that I think presenting reasonable discussion points with reasonable people can actually resolve anything. You and your colleagues keep proving me wrong on that.

I will disagree with you though on the DJ that the company has filed - it is just a delaying tactic for some long term strategic goal that they have - it has nothing to do with accepting a different list and a DFR II.

I think it's both but in any case they're just following USAPA's lead. Don't forget we were close to getting a joint CBA in 2007 when the company was profitable. Nobody to blame but the East for pulling out of negotiations in a snit. If USAPA decides to accept the arbitrated list we could actually get some leverage as a unified pilot group. It's up to you.

If they wanted a new contract with certain conditions and restrictions that they felt would be voted in with a majority - it would have happened awhile ago -

I know you really, really, really want to believe what $eham and Ghengis Cleary have told you but just because the Addington verdict was overturned on ripeness doesn't mean it's like it never happened. A jury of twelve unanimously found USAPA violated its DFR and the company lawyers figure that means it would likely happen again.

...if a majority passes it especially in the PHX base - how could that be a DFR litigation II?

You're right. I challenge USAPA to present a TA that the majority of PHX pilots could vote for. I'll look forward to it.