RJDC Industry and Legal Update

[braveheart]

Braveheart, as I stated to Sig earlier, I'm not an expert on AAA or PSA MEC matters. The details of the J4J agreement, slotted bidding, etc... are not things that I'm overly familiar with. I can only speak to the generalities of the ways that MECs are required to do business. Confidentiality agreements are one of these ways. As to the specific circumstances in the AAA J4J protocols, I don't have the information to speak to that.

PCL:

That's a lawyerly statement if I've ever heard one...

 

[PCL_128]

PCL:

That's a lawyerly statement if I've ever heard one...

Lawyerly? Hey, them's fightin' words!

Seriously, what would you have me do? Answer questions that I don't have the personal knowledge to answer? Sorry, not gonna happen. I simply don't have the details about the J4J protocols. It's never been something that I've delved into. Trust me, I have plenty of other ALPA work to deal with. I can't keep up with every MEC, every LOA, and every dispute within the Association.

 

[FDJ2]

PCL, don't waste your time debating DF and JB. There lawsuit to eliminate scope protections is going nowhere but the trash heap. The discovery phase was catastrophic for them. Their depositions were weak and actually support ALPA.

I'll soon be posting a RJDC Litigation Update of my own.

 

[PCL_128]

Their depositions were weak and actually support ALPA.

Agreed. I've enjoyed reading them, actually. The one major conclusion that can be drawn from them: Haber is an arrogant, pompous bafoon. :laugh:

I'll soon be posting a RJDC Litigation Update of my own.

Oh, I can't wait for that!

 

[braveheart]

The one major conclusion that can be drawn from them: Haber is an arrogant, pompous bafoon.

PCL,

For someone who just resorted to legal phraseology in order to extract yourself from the wrong end of the J4J debate, you're in no position to be criticizing legal counsel.

 

[PCL_128]

PCL,

For someone who just resorted to legal phraseology in order to extract yourself from the wrong end of the J4J debate, you're in no position to be criticizing legal counsel.

Whatever you say, Dan.

 

[bvt1151]

I've now lost all faith in airline pilots' collective intelligence.

That's why I support the only truly intelligent four-lettered organization of pilots, and its not A-L-P-A.

 

[JoeMerchant]

John, when was the last BOD you attended? Have you ever attended a BOD meeting?

I would love to, but I'm not invited. What does that have to do with the roll call advantage that is enjoyed by the mainline carriers?

 

[JoeMerchant]

Braveheart, as I stated to Sig earlier, I'm not an expert on AAA or PSA MEC matters. The details of the J4J agreement, slotted bidding, etc... are not things that I'm overly familiar with. I can only speak to the generalities of the ways that MECs are required to do business. Confidentiality agreements are one of these ways. As to the specific circumstances in the AAA J4J protocols, I don't have the information to speak to that.

But you do have the information to speak as to the DFR claims involved between ASA/CMR pilots and ALPA?

 

[PCL_128]

I would love to, but I'm not invited.

I wonder why?

What does that have to do with the roll call advantage that is enjoyed by the mainline carriers?

You are attacking a governing body that you have never observed in action. You imply that the members of the BOD are biased and won't listen to reasonable suggestions by B-carriers, but you have never observed this yourself. I just find that interesting.

 

[PCL_128]

But you do have the information to speak as to the DFR claims involved between ASA/CMR pilots and ALPA?

The lawsuit, the allegations made by Ford, Ashcraft, yourself, et al., DFR law in general, and other related items to the RJDC and the associated litigation have been items that I have studied in depth. That can not be said for the J4J matters that Braveheart discussed earlier.

 

[JoeMerchant]

I wonder why?

Because I am an open supporter of RJDC and our MEC was threatened by ALPA that "we wouldn't have money to put paper in the copy machine" if the MEC supported RJDC. MEC's become beholden to the $ from Herndon and principles are discarded to conform to political realities.

You are attacking a governing body that you have never observed in action. You imply that the members of the BOD are biased and won't listen to reasonable suggestions by B-carriers, but you have never observed this yourself. I just find that interesting.

I have attacked Congress, and yet I have never observed it in action either. Are the only people that should attack Congress or the ALPA BOD, people that have actually observed either in action? If so, that is a small number of citizens and members of ALPA that would be able to criticize either.

All members and all MEC's are biased - to insinuate otherwise is naive at best. You are biased, I am biased, and every other member and MEC is biased. Those with the most votes are able to force their biases on the rest - that is a political reality.

 

[FDJ2]

PCL,

For someone who just resorted to legal phraseology in order to extract yourself from the wrong end of the J4J debate, you're in no position to be criticizing legal counsel.

The Haber seemed frustrated, he just couldn't get any "red meat". His little temper tantrums were funny. I actually feel sorry for him.

 

[braveheart]

I'll soon be posting a RJDC Litigation Update of my own.

FDJ2:

First, imitation is indeed the sincerest form of flattery. If the RJDC Updates weren't being read, then presumably you would wouldn't be so bothered with them.

Second, take a lesson from the RJDC and ensure that you include numerous factual references and authorities in your update. ALPA's publications are full of political sound bites and light on documentation.

Third, while you're at it, how but setting up a public web site with thousands of pages of scope information for all to read, like the RJDC has. All ALPA offers is a few threads on its private boards and a few glossy pages in their semi-monthly magazine.

Fourth, the RJDC leadership takes a lot of flak for their stance. So if you want to imitate them, please have the courage to sign your own name to your update like they have.

www.rjdefense.com

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

When growth returns and the majors start hiring, intrests in the RJDC will fade.....

So will outcries for Single sen lists, min pay rates, etc...

The problem.... When the good times return so will the desire to prepare for the down cycle... and we will be caught again....fat dumb and happy....

 

[JoeMerchant]

When growth returns and the majors start hiring, intrests in the RJDC will fade.....

So will outcries for Single sen lists, min pay rates, etc...

The problem.... When the good times return so will the desire to prepare for the down cycle... and we will be caught again....fat dumb and happy....

On this we agree Rez. The leverage to fix this problem exists when times are good. The desire to fix this problem only exists when times are bad and the leverage isn't there. This becomes a circular problem.

 

[AutoBus]

This is nuts

Why would anyone want to stay at a regional long enough for this to matter?

Get in, get your time, move on.....

RJ operators are ALL contract carriers, they can and will be replaced.

ALPA? scope? You RJDC guys NO HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN, You operate routes mainline tells you too, In fact most of those cities you fly into used to be mainline cities, if anyone has a right to complain it is the mainline guys. Mainline want's to replace you with it's own equipment or another RJ operator, Tough S***