Seniority dispute ends at US Airways

[TWA Dude]

So, Mr. Turtle, each MEC spent millions of dollars and months of effort just to get a "proposal". Gee, I wonder why a federal jury didn't believe you.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Of course, doesn't the company pay hundreds of thousands for the union to come up with it's crew meal or hostage and internment or vacation proposals?

Do you think that USAPA will have to assess the pilots to give the money back?

 

[Cowboy75]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKib-3eGmCE&feature=related

Which was a better plan? Escape binding arbitration through ALPA or USAPA? Interesting look back.

No matter what vehicle you use, there will be no escaping the Nic decision.

 

[C Festerpuss]

I got’s me this hear Micosoft Winders -Bubba version… It’s great.

http://swellguy.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341d1ea853ef01156e9403fa970c-popup

After all this seniority stuff gets floated unner the bridge,I’ll be fixin to have everyone over for some Bar-B-Que, beer and udder fun stiff,like a belly floppin contest.

http://c1915162.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/summer-redneck-games2.jpg

I one’s it las yar…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01388/redneck_1388972i.jpg

I got’s me a country hi-rise trailer, …..http://i1.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/-1/draft_lens3130832module19615172photo_1236502692hillbilly_redneck-mansion.jpg

We cans all pitch horse shoes….

http://www.rednecks.info/pictures/redneck-horseshoes.jpg

An well have plenty of beer...

http://www.lilligren.com/Redneck/images/redneck_party_cooler.jpg

My sis Daisy had a great time las year…http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_uu4KpLK_6gc/SOVU34DqBbI/AAAAAAAABnU/dVMscNHJ1YA/s400/redneck_pics_naptime.jpg

I jes cain’t wait to try out my new super security versionBar-B-Que

http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2008/8/3/633533222041207585-OMGWTFBBQRedneckGrill.jpg

Yall come down now…hear?

Yer Frien,Cletus Festerpuss…Redneck Aviator
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/65000/Air-Redneck--65220.jpg

 

[Cowboy75]

I got’s me this hear Micosoft Winders -Bubba version… It’s great.

http://swellguy.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341d1ea853ef01156e9403fa970c-popup

After all this seniority stuff gets floated unner the bridge,I’ll be fixin to have everyone over for some Bar-B-Que, beer and udder fun stiff,like a belly floppin contest.

http://c1915162.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/summer-redneck-games2.jpg

I one’s it las yar…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01388/redneck_1388972i.jpg

I got’s me a country hi-rise trailer, …..http://i1.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/-1/draft_lens3130832module19615172photo_1236502692hillbilly_redneck-mansion.jpg

We cans all pitch horse shoes….

http://www.rednecks.info/pictures/redneck-horseshoes.jpg

An well have plenty of beer...

http://www.lilligren.com/Redneck/images/redneck_party_cooler.jpg

My sis Daisy had a great time las year…http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_uu4KpLK_6gc/SOVU34DqBbI/AAAAAAAABnU/dVMscNHJ1YA/s400/redneck_pics_naptime.jpg

I jes cain’t wait to try out my new super security versionBar-B-Que

http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2008/8/3/633533222041207585-OMGWTFBBQRedneckGrill.jpg

Yall come down now…hear?

Yer Frien,Cletus Festerpuss…Redneck Aviator
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/65000/Air-Redneck--65220.jpg

Cletus,

If I could find a Billy Beer, I'd toast you.

Thanks for the laugh...

 

[Cowboy75]

Leonidas update: Addington claim ripe.

Pending before Judge Wake are:
(i) Plaintiffs’ Rule 60 Motion For Relief From Judgment.
(ii) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Transfer US Airways’ Declaratory Action from Judge Silver.

Our Rule 60(b) motion was filed because the company’s declaratory action along with USAPA’s actions post 9th make the original Addington claim ripe. Since Addington was dismissed by Judges Tashima and Graber on ripeness grounds only, and since the ripeness analysis changed since the dismissal, Addington should be reopened. Both criminal and civil rules of procedure provide mechanisms for cases to be reopened by the district court if a party can show that changed circumstances warrant another look. For civil cases, that’s a Rule 60 “Relief From Judgment or Order” and that is what we filed on August 6th. What USAPA filed last Monday was their response (Doc 654) to our motion to reopen. It’s 20 pages and contains nothing unusual from USAPA legal. They make it all the way through two sentences before grossly mischaracterizing both our motion and what a Rule 60(b) is. Unlike what USAPA says, no one is asking Judge Wake to overturn the 9th Circuit. Such a request would be imbecilic and totally ineffectual. Perhaps, USAPA legal spit out their 20 pages without reading the actual 60(b) motion, but the changed circumstances which warrant the reopening of Addington is the company’s declaratory action, referred to as “US Airways” in our reply brief. The declaratory action raises the issue of negotiating seniority in the context of Section 2 of the RLA, which is virtually identical to the issue raised in Addington. The 9th Circuit dismissed our case for not being ripe. However, the ripeness analysis changed due to events subsequent to the 9th’s decision. The Addington attorneys laid it out clearly in our filing last week, our reply (doc 655) to USAPA’s response (doc 654) to our 60(b) motion:

“In other words, Addington is ripe if US Airways is ripe and US Airways is ripe because of events that occurred after the July 2009 judgment and injunction were vacated. US Airways requires a determination of USAPA’s breach of the duty of fair representation. That determination in US Airways will have preclusive effect in Addington. As such, both the West Pilots and USAPA would be precluded from contesting that issue in Addington. See Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147, 153 (1979). The factual dispute at the core of Addington would be subject to issue preclusion. At that point, there will be no prudential reason to delay a decision for lack of ripeness.” West Reply, Doc. 655, pg. 4.

The US Airways in italics refers to the company’s declaratory action. Mentioned in the second to last sentence in the quote above is a legal doctrine known as Issue Preclusion. This doctrine dates all the way back to common law, and the gist of it is that claims are not litigated twice. Once a court has decided an issue of law or fact necessary to reach a judgment, then that’s it for the issue – for eternity. The issue cannot be re-litigated in a future claim. Here, the present claim is the company’s declaratory action. If there is a final judgment on the issue of whether use of a non-Nicolau seniority list is an unfair labor practice (company’s declaratory action), then issue preclusion kicks in once we reach a joint contract and DFR II would be ripe as we would have already litigated this in the company’s case. Now, the final twist is that we have already conducted a trial on the merits concerning use of a non-Nicolau list, and that was DFR I. The ONLY reason that result is not with us today is because of ripeness. At this point, rather than cut and paste a few pages from Document 645 which is our 60(b) motion, we would direct the reader to click here and download it. It is worth reading the entire document as Addington attorneys connect the links of the ripeness chain that take us right back to DFR I, and why the company’s action coupled with USAPA action post 9th, make DFR I ripe. Since DFR I was dismissed only because of ripeness, and since DFR I is now ripe, Rule 60(b) allows us to ask the trial judge to reopen that case, which is exactly what we are asking Judge Wake to do. USAPA legal misses badly when they try to characterize the 60(b) motion as an attempt to overturn the circuit court. Nothing could be further from the truth. Once again, the trademark attack of USAPA legal is revealing itself: “. . . it’s ALPA’s, the West’s, the company’s, the arbitrator’s, and numerous players to be named later at fault. They’re wrong and we can do whatever we want because the RLA says so.”

29 months, and USAPA has nothing to show for their work. The only winner in this has been SSM&P.

 

[Bringupthebird]

I still don't think you'll get a court to agree that there is harm until the first east pilot achieves a gain due a west pilot ( or conversely a west pilot is improperly harmed)had Nicolau been implemented. My personal opinion is that once a joint contract is signed the fleet numbers will decrease and pilots will face furlough, the order of which will be the question.

US management would do better to ask the court to vacate the TA and allow the company to open new west pilot bases in east coast hubs with east coast equipment, if for nothing else the motivational factor for USAPA to do something.

 

[gutshotdraw]

I still don't think you'll get a court to agree that there is harm until the first east pilot achieves a gain due a west pilot ( or conversely a west pilot is improperly harmed)had Nicolau been implemented.

You mean, like West pilots being furloughed out of Nic seniority?

 

[Cowboy75]

Access Denied
A quick update from the PHX domicile meeting from one of the West reps:

For those that missed it or could not attend. Your reps put out a lot of good information covering a lot of subjects.

The more important thing that happened today that everyone should be aware of has to do with two nation USAPA officers. I invited Gary Hummel the new EVP and Rob Streble the S/T out to PHX to attend our meeting. They both agreed and showed up at the meeting about 30 minutes prior.

However they informed us that they had been “ordered” prohibited from attending the PHX domicile meeting. When we asked by whom or for what reason they declined to answer any questions. Simply saying that they would rather not talk about it.

So here we have two willing officer who came out to PHX and have been denied access to a domicile meeting by some unknown person.

Your reps find this completely unacceptable and lodged our complaint with the BPR. As we get more information we will let you know. But wanted to inform everyone that your national officer have been blocked access to the west pilots.
__________________
USAPA’s sole objective in adopting and presenting its seniority proposal to the Airline was to benefit East Pilots at the expense of West Pilots, rather than to benefit the bargaining unit as a whole.

 

[Ocity]

Access Denied
A quick update from the PHX domicile meeting from one of the West reps:

For those that missed it or could not attend. Your reps put out a lot of good information covering a lot of subjects.

The more important thing that happened today that everyone should be aware of has to do with two nation USAPA officers. I invited Gary Hummel the new EVP and Rob Streble the S/T out to PHX to attend our meeting. They both agreed and showed up at the meeting about 30 minutes prior.

However they informed us that they had been “ordered” prohibited from attending the PHX domicile meeting. When we asked by whom or for what reason they declined to answer any questions. Simply saying that they would rather not talk about it.

So here we have two willing officer who came out to PHX and have been denied access to a domicile meeting by some unknown person.

Your reps find this completely unacceptable and lodged our complaint with the BPR. As we get more information we will let you know. But wanted to inform everyone that your national officer have been blocked access to the west pilots.
__________________
USAPA’s sole objective in adopting and presenting its seniority proposal to the Airline was to benefit East Pilots at the expense of West Pilots, rather than to benefit the bargaining unit as a whole.

More Antics from USAPA...the organization that makes picket line crossing Scabs look like Ceasar Chavez.