Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

RJDC update ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter flaps30
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 2

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
It will take as long as two weeks for the Judge to rule on the motions brought before the Court. Given recent events, the re-establishment of scope and the threats made by the Delta MEC Chairman against the Comair MEC, ALPA had to withdraw several parts of their defense. ALPA's present and future plans forced them to withdraw their arguement that scope limits had no effect.

Given the genuine issues involved, I doubt the case will be dismissed.

------------
Oral Arguments Completed

On Friday, January 31, 2003, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York heard oral arguments on ALPA’s motion to dismiss Ford v. ALPA and plaintiffs’ motion to add more than three hundred additional plaintiffs to the suit. At the start of the hearing, ALPA informed the court that in view of the new scope agreement at Delta Air Lines, which restored the scope ratios, it would withdraw its argument that plaintiff’s scope claims were moot. Consequently, the majority of the hearing focused on ALPA’s arguments that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and that the complaint failed to state viable claims.

ALPA contended that the suit was a “disguised” attempt to circumvent the exclusive authority of the National Mediation Board to make class and craft certifications for bargaining purposes. Plaintiffs pointed out that the suit does not seek to disturb the NMB’s current certifications and that the obvious issue is ALPA’s perpetuation of an inherent conflict of interest and its support of the predatory mainline bargaining. In addition, plaintiffs point out that the Duty of Fair Representation (DFR) is a judicially created standard and that ALPA’s motion seeks to abrogate a half-century of DFR law. After considering the oral and written arguments, the court will render a decision on both motions.
 
Re: Ohhh Texan Aviator........

Marko Ramius said:
When this thread gets longer than the Trans Siberian Railway, you'll regret having asked that question!:)
So what is it? I've seen the term used, just never understood.:confused: :o
 
R - Regional
J - Jet
D - Defense
C - Coalition

Do a search on "RJDC Update" and you will see a thread with over 200 replies. Take a few hours to read it and you will understand a little better what it means.

PUKE
 

Latest resources

Back
Top