RJDC Update 10-28-06

[bvt1151]

If the supporters/members of the rjdc would have started the job hunting process instead of this lawsuit they would most likely already have the job they are suing for today. How many people have moved on to another job over the three or four years the RJDC has been litigating. Comair alone has had hundreds MOVE UP THE LADDER to jetblue, southwest, continental, ect in the last two or three years. What makes you guys better than the rest of us that have prepared, interviewed, and achieved the next level on our own merit and abilities?

You've missed the point entirely. The RJDC is not in this for themselves. Never were, never will be. That's a blanket argument you'll hear from a lot of Delta guys. Since day one Dan Ford has admitted that this is going to cost him a ton of money that he'll never see back. Its not about money. Get over that. Its about ALPA being accountable to its constiuents. We all talk about improving ALPA, but only the RJDC is doing something about it.

 

[AZ Typed]

Quote: Does anyone care? Quote:


Exactly

 

[~~~^~~~]

As you get away from the rumor-mongering in the crew rooms and move into the ALPA structure, you begin to realize that things aren't anywhere near what the conspiracy-theorists believe. That's what JC realized, and that's what all of you would realize if you actually got involved instead of spreading discontent.

PCL - you have a point. In reality ALPA is not well enough coordinated to pull off a conspiracy.

None the less, ALPA has failed to equally represent members at regional carriers and has failed in its fiduciary duty to not harm them. That is what ALPA is on trial for.

IMHO ALPA's decision to blame management suggests a conspiracy between ALPA and DAL management. This may be after the fact spin, but none the less it is what they have testified to under oath and now they have to live with it. I am positive the Delta MEC traded Connection scope, pay and jobs for its own benefit and ALPA failed in its duty to restrain them from harming DCI pilots. ALPA spin is actually harming the legal merits of their defense.

ALPA has lawyers that practice politics instead of law. This is becoming a case they can not hope to win. In the alternative they will drag this out as long as they can. ALPA legal is making an attack on the RJDC's corporate structure - but there is not anything there, so it doesn't matter to the case.

The RJDC expects ALPA to follow past practice and is prepared to bring the matter forward as long as it takes.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The RJDC expects ALPA to follow past practice and is prepared to bring the matter forward as long as it takes.

At what expense....?? In any system there is going to be flaws, not perfection...

What the RJDC has done was vocalize for the minority. Has the RJDC realized its effect on the majority.

Perhaps the RJDC would be more effective in decertifying ALPA at the regionals? Not that I advocate that...

Where the RJDC has lost creditbility is not by raising the issue, but coming up with a workable solution that is agreeable to the majority....

In addition, if the RJDC's movement were true, then would a grassroots movement be long underway at the UAL, CAL, AMR and NWA regionals...??

 

[PCL_128]

IMHO ALPA's decision to blame management suggests a conspiracy between ALPA and DAL management. This may be after the fact spin, but none the less it is what they have testified to under oath and now they have to live with it. I am positive the Delta MEC traded Connection scope, pay and jobs for its own benefit and ALPA failed in its duty to restrain them from harming DCI pilots. ALPA spin is actually harming the legal merits of their defense.

That is a complete misrepresentation of the testimony given. There was never any conspiracy with management, there was no testimony that suggest any "trading" of scope, pay or anything else. You're seeing what you want to see in the testimony rather than what was actually said. The judge won't be nearly as susceptible to suggestion.

 

[~~~^~~~]

PCL - MY opinion (hence the IMHO qualifier) is also based on written discovery and the "bargaining credits."

But it only stands to reason that the Delta pilots "traded" scope. Are you trying to say they simply gave away nearly half of their block hours with nothing in return? If so, what does that say for ALPA?

You can't ignore the obvious without making the union look even more ineffective.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

But it only stands to reason that the Delta pilots "traded" scope. Are you trying to say they simply gave away nearly half of their block hours with nothing in return? If so, what does that say for ALPA?

That Air Line Pilots Don't Run Airlines....

 

[JoeMerchant]

That Air Line Pilots Don't Run Airlines....

Then what are scope sections about?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Then what are scope sections about?

Then why have a grievance procedure?

 

[JoeMerchant]

Then why have a grievance procedure?

Not sure what your getting at Rez. My point was in response to the line "pilots don't run airlines". If that was entirely true, and we believed that, then we wouldn't have a section 1. If the airline wants to outsource flying then that is their choice according to your logic - after all they are running the airline, not us. If the airline wants to add 100 E190s to their affiliated regionals, then you let them, because they are running the airline.

 

[737 Pylt]

You've missed the point entirely. The RJDC is not in this for themselves. Never were, never will be. That's a blanket argument you'll hear from a lot of Delta guys. Since day one Dan Ford has admitted that this is going to cost him a ton of money that he'll never see back. Its not about money. Get over that. Its about ALPA being accountable to its constiuents. We all talk about improving ALPA, but only the RJDC is doing something about it.

I love when morons like this spout off!

Explain this then??

h. as to the claims set forth in Count VIII, such sum as may be determined
at trial, but in no event less than the sum of Two Million Dollars
($2,000,000.00) each.

i. as to the claims set forth in Count IX,
such sum as may be determined at trial, but in no event less than Two
Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars each.

j. as to the claims set forth in Count X,
such sum as may be determined at trial, but in no event less than Two
Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) Dollars each, plus the cumulative sum of One
Hundred Million ($100,000,000.00) as exemplary and punitive damages.

k. as to the claims set forth in Count XI, such sum as may be determined at
trial, but in no event less than Two Million ($2,000,000.00) each.

l. as to the claims set forth in Count XII, such sum as may be determined at
trial, but in no event less than Two Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars each.

m. as to the claims set forth in Count XIII,
such sum as may be determined at trial, but in no event less than Two
Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars each.

Don't go spending all your money there sparky! Danno promised to make all you girls 767 captains and millionaires, and he is gasping for desparation. I'll only be too happy to oblige when the countersuit goes after you pukes for time and money wasted on this frivilous lawsuit!

737

 

[N2264J]

I'll only be too happy to oblige when the countersuit goes after you pukes for time and money wasted on this frivilous lawsuit!

When the judge threw out ALPA's motion to dismiss, he simultaneously recommended that the lawsuit be turned into a class action. Why would he do that if he thought the grievance didn't have any merit?

[Interpretation: the litigation is not frivolous and a countersuit is just a 737 Pylt wetdream]

 

[737 Pylt]

When the judge threw out ALPA's motion to dismiss, he simultaneously recommended that the lawsuit be turned into a class action. Why would he do that if he thought the grievance didn't have any merit?

Before you and your girls go hiney slapping each other, don't forget, or did you just choose to omit in usual rjdc fashion, that 9 out of 10 claims were dismissed? But whatever it takes to keep the $$ coming in. As a cmr pilot, you might want to hold on to whatever money you're making!

[Interpretation: the litigation is not frivolous and a countersuit is just a 737 Pylt wetdream]

Only when I'm over at your sisters!

737

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Not sure what your getting at Rez. My point was in response to the line "pilots don't run airlines". If that was entirely true, and we believed that, then we wouldn't have a section 1. If the airline wants to outsource flying then that is their choice according to your logic - after all they are running the airline, not us. If the airline wants to add 100 E190s to their affiliated regionals, then you let them, because they are running the airline.

A CBA is nothing without good scope. But even scope can be violated. Thus the grievance process... and supportive politics at both the Hill and White House.

So maybe the RJDC isn't just about ALPA but an entire system of politics, Fed law, corporate and country culture.....

 

[FDJ2]

When the judge threw out ALPA's motion to dismiss, he simultaneously recommended that the lawsuit be turned into a class action. Why would he do that if he thought the grievance didn't have any merit?

[Interpretation: the litigation is not frivolous and a countersuit is just a 737 Pylt wetdream]

I love it when RJDC mouthpieces show their true ignorance.

Let me educate you, because you need it.

He made NO decision based on the merits of the claim. He simply ruled that he had subject matter jurisdiction to hear the claim.

"Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction over this case."

"plaintiffs’ claims and such defenses can be heard on the merits after discovery."

Here's the standard required to summarily dismiss a complaint:

A complaint should not be dismissed “unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.”

Guess what, despite that high standard 9 out of 10 RJDC frivilous claims were summarily dismissed. We'll see if the lone surviving claim will survive the next motion to dismiss now that the litigation has finally finished its discovery phase.

Why did the judge want the lawsuit to be turned into a class action. Simple, it's more efficient for the court.

Here's what the judge said:

"The efficient administration of judicial resources would suggest that, rather than joining 300 more parties to the action, the parties should consider identifying a suitable class representative (or representatives) for the Comair pilots collectively, and then seek class certification at an appropriate time"

 

[michael707767]

don't confuse them with the facts.

 

[737 Pylt]

I love it when RJDC mouthpieces show their true ignorance.

Let me educate you, because you need it.

He made NO decision based on the merits of the claim. He simply ruled that he had subject matter jurisdiction to hear the claim.

"Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction over this case."

"plaintiffs’ claims and such defenses can be heard on the merits after discovery."

Here's the standard required to summarily dismiss a complaint:

A complaint should not be dismissed “unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.”

Guess what, despite that high standard 9 out of 10 RJDC frivilous claims were summarily dismissed. We'll see if the lone surviving claim will survive the next motion to dismiss now that the litigation has finally finished its discovery phase.

Why did the judge want the lawsuit to be turned into a class action. Simple, it's more efficient for the court.

Here's what the judge said:

"The efficient administration of judicial resources would suggest that, rather than joining 300 more parties to the action, the parties should consider identifying a suitable class representative (or representatives) for the Comair pilots collectively, and then seek class certification at an appropriate time"

Damn it FDJ2, there you go again providing facts!
Something the rjdc has never been able to do! But they do one heck of a job distorting them!
737

 

[FDJ2]

dang it FDJ2, there you go again providing facts!
Something the rjdc has never been able to do! But they do one heck of a job distorting them!
737

And it is precisely because the RJDC has purposefully led a campaign of half truths and falsehoods throughout this litigation that so many pilots like "N" , who generally speaking no longer have any idea what the truth and facts are, because they have been consistently fed a diet of RJDC empty rhetoric and disinformation, that I feel an obligation to establish a series of RJDC Re Education threads.

 

[N2264J]

Let me educate you, because you need it. He made NO decision based on the merits of the claim. He simply ruled that he had subject matter jurisdiction to hear the claim.

I'm not saying he made a decision (ruling) based on the merit. What I said was, why recommend going through the motions of certifying the class if you didn't think the suit is going anywhere? It's more work for the court hearing and considering motions and rebuttals. Instead of 300 plaintiffs, it may well be more like 3,000. Your hysteria is understandable.

Guess what, despite that high standard 9 out of 10 RJDC frivilous claims were summarily dismissed.

All the claims that were dismissed (except three, I think) were redundant. In other words, the judge said they were absorbed and already covered by the flagship grievance, the Duty of Fair Representation. Therefore, the litigation moves forward on the fundamental claim, DFR. I'm not sure why that has to be explained to you and 737 every couple of months.

 

[737 Pylt]

I'm not saying he made a decision (ruling) based on the merit. What I said was, why recommend going through the motions of certifying the class if you didn't think the suit is going anywhere? It's more work for the court hearing and considering motions and rebuttals. Instead of 300 plaintiffs, it may well be more like 3,000. Your hysteria is understandable.

Nice back pedal!

Translation:

I got caught with my pants down, and everyone can see I have a small pee pee!

All the claims that were dismissed (except three, I think) were redundant. In other words, the judge said they were absorbed and already covered by the flagship grievance, the Duty of Fair Representation. Therefore, the litigation moves forward on the fundamental claim, DFR. I'm not sure why that has to be explained to you and 737 every couple of months.

Again, nice back pedal!
No wonder danno loves girls like you! Keep sending in those funds!

 

[~~~^~~~]

I got caught with my pants down, and everyone can see I have a small pee pee!

...just wanted to see this in quotes attributed to 737 pilot. What happened to the potato, did it get lost on an overnight?

 

[737 Pylt]

...just wanted to see this in quotes attributed to 737 pilot. What happened to the potato, did it get lost on an overnight?

I left it at the layover hotel in......Amsterdam!

737

BTW, for someone who even started a thread about "retirement," you sure have come back with a vengance!

 

[FDJ2]

N2264J;1165147]why recommend going through the motions of certifying the class if you didn't think the suit is going anywhere?

Please read his reason S-L-O-W-L-Y this time.

"The efficient administration of judicial resources would suggest that, rather than joining 300 more parties to the action, the parties should consider identifying a suitable class representative (or representatives) for the Comair pilots collectively, and then seek class certification at an appropriate time"

It's more efficient, than having to continually re hear the case over and over again whenever the RJDC decides to trott out another batch of plaintiffs. Nothing more, nothing less. What surprised me was that Haber and the RJDC didn't think of this before, unless of course that was their intent from the beginning.

All the claims that were dismissed (except three, I think) were redundant.

Your getting warmer. Here's the actual breakdown of all the claims. Please read it S-L-O-W-L-Y so that next time you'll get it right.

Plaintiffs first claim that ALPA’s efforts on behalf of the Delta pilots at the expense of Comair pilots constitutes a breach of the duty of fair representation because they are arbitrary, discriminatory and taken in bad faith.

To the extent that Defendants had a rational basis for taking the actions they did, or lacked a discriminatory or bad faith motive, plaintiffs’ claims and such defenses can be heard on the merits after discovery.

Plaintiffs’ second and third claims for relief seek the same injunction based on the alleged breach of ALPA’s Constitution and By-Laws, and its alleged breach of fiduciary duty owed to the plaintiffs as members of the union.

In the present case, however, it is clear that both the breach of contract and the fiduciary duty claims are necessarily duplicative of and preempted by the duty of fair representation claim.

In their fourth, fifth and sixth claims for relief, plaintiffs allege that ALPA, by its failure to process, let alone expeditiously, these grievances, has breached its duty of fair representation, violated its Constitution and By-Laws, and breached its fiduciary duties, and seek money damages, including punitive damages, as a result.

In their seventh, eighth and ninth claims for relief, plaintiffs claim that ALPA’s failure to convene a hearing board constitutes a breach of its duty of fair representation, a violation of the ALPA’s Constitution and By-Laws, and a breach of its fiduciary duty.

Claims IV through IX are dismissed since it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.

Finally, plaintiffs also claim that by excluding Comair pilots from participating in deliberations that directly affect their rights, privileges, employment opportunities and career objectives, ALPA has breached its duties to them and denied them their rights under section 411 of the LMRDA.

The LMRDA does not requires a union to extend to members of one bargaining unit the right to participate in the deliberations and vote on the matters before another bargaining unit, even when the second unit’s actions might affect the rights of members in the first unit.
’
It looks like 7 claims were summarily dismissed, but than again math in public is dangerous.