The big vote. Any guesses?

[SaturnPilot]

they very well may be able to change the award via lawsuit...however, decertifying ALPA is once again not neccessary in order to win that lawsuit.

 

[charlie2]

True but I believe that ALPA yes yes both our pilots and national should have at least stood up for this group because THEY WERE NOT FURLOUGHED.

 

[TWA Dude]

yeah on the side of the MDA planes it said, "Operated by US Airways"......now how do you say they weren't part of US Airways???

My paycheck stub and W2 read "America West Airlines" -- but there is no more America West! How can this be? Answer: neither a paint job nor letterhead determine true employment status. Nice try.

Maybe Nic couldn't read huh?

Nicolau can read a lot better than you can. He understood full well what MDA was. quote from Nicolau Award, Page 20:

Before turning to the building blocks of our decision and the
reasons for those choices, a preliminary matter needs to be
addressed. That is the question of the CEL pilots. Some 105 such
pilots (4993-5098) appear on the US Airways May 19, 2005 Certified
Seniority List. However, none had flown for the mainline; all were
pilots at Mid-Atlantic Airways, a regional carrier designed to be a US Airways
wholly-owned subsidiary, but actually flown at all times during its short existence
on the mainline's operating certificate as a division of US Airways.

Barring any proof of impropriety no court will overturn an arbitrator's ruling, guaranteed. MDA was operated as a separate division and thus that's what it was. Thus the paint job, paystub, and union status aren't relevent.

 

[SaturnPilot]

True but I believe that ALPA yes yes both our pilots and national should have at least stood up for this group because THEY WERE NOT FURLOUGHED.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the East MEC did stand up for these pilots and have them as not furloughed going into the merger negotiations. If that is not the case, then as you have stated, that would be the fault of the local reps. National as a rule stays out of these negotiations, for GOOD reason. Once the issue goes to binding arbitration, there is nothing that National can do.

If the award needs to be protested, then the appropriate vehicle for that is the lawsuit, which is what is happening. National should not get involved with that either, since they also represent AWA pilots, just as USAPA would. If National got involved in this lawsuit, they would in turn get sued for DFR for attempting to change a binding arbitration award, just as USAPA would. The lawsuit will run its course as intended without National involvement. I understand this issue is important to you, but it seems you want National to acheive the un-attainable.

 

[charlie2]

TWA Dude I'm really talking about the guys who lost big here...the almost 200 guys furloughed from US Airways, then recalled to the 170, not the CEL guys.

SaturnPilot I think that even in a BINDING arbitration situation a national union has the right to speak out, there was no gag order.

 

[PCL_128]

ALPA's merger policy prevents the National union from speaking out on SLI issues. Again, to do so would show favoritism to one side or the other. If National had spoken out about this, then the AWA MEC could claim that National was favoring the East pilots. National can't get caught in the middle. That's exactly why you have binding arbitration. A neutral arbitrator can decide without having any conflict of interest.

 

[charlie2]

By pointing out that there was a mistake in the status of 200 or so pilots I don't think is being "caught in the middle". If Nic put the most senior Capt in the west on the bottom I bet that Capt would have expected ALPA to HELP correct that mistake.

 

[LearLove]

Whatever the vote, the award by the mediator will stand.

I agree with ultra here. Even if ALPA is voted out I don't think the Nic award will change (unless both sides come to a diff agreement).

If you want to vote ALPA out do it for whatever reason but don't do it thinking it will change the award to DOH.

 

[charlie2]

Absolutely, I am voting USAPA not because I think they will change Nic but because I have no confidence in ALPA based on everything we've talked about.

 

[TWA Dude]

TWA Dude I'm really talking about the guys who lost big here...the almost 200 guys furloughed from US Airways, then recalled to the 170, not the CEL guys.

I'm aware of that. That paragraph explained how Nicolau ruled on MDA's status.

Consider this: let's say that Nicolau ruled that MDA was, in fact, Mainline and those pilots weren't furloughed at merger time. We all know that the furloughed pilots were placed junior to active AWA pilots. We also know that not all furloughees who were offered slots at MDA accepted them. Would you have expected Nicolau to individually place each MDA pilot someplace senior to furloughees? In other words, you think he should've rearranged the East seniority list based on those who went to MDA?

Short answers: no and no. And no judge will rearrange the East list either.

SaturnPilot I think that even in a BINDING arbitration situation a national union has the right to speak out, there was no gag order.

Not answering for him, but when ALPA Merger Policy places an arbitrator's ruling as the final authority that means there's not a darned thing ALPA can do or say exept binding is binding. Prater and the EC must be officially neutral as to the merits of the arbitrator's ruling. And BTW, I haven't heared any other MECs complaining they think the East got screwed.

If Nic put the most senior Capt in the west on the bottom I bet that Capt would have expected ALPA to HELP correct that mistake.

You just don't get it. ALPA can't violate its own policy! The highest authority to settle a dispute between two ALPA entities isn't Prater, isn't the EC, isn't the EB, isn't the rank-and-file pilots, it's the ABRITRATOR. Whether you or I think he ruled fairly is irrelevent. He's like the US Supreme Court for unions -- there is no appeal and no higher authority.

 

[TWA Dude]

Absolutely, I am voting USAPA not because I think they will change Nic but because I have no confidence in ALPA based on everything we've talked about.

Then prepare to lose your confidence in USAPA as well, if they win. Because I can guarantee you they won't accomplish anything more for the East pilots than ALPA. Your problems don't stem from your union...

 

[charlie2]

You're convincing me even more I don't need ALPA.

 

[TWA Dude]

Perfect! So don't vote at all.

 

[PCL_128]

By pointing out that there was a mistake in the status of 200 or so pilots I don't think is being "caught in the middle". If Nic put the most senior Capt in the west on the bottom I bet that Capt would have expected ALPA to HELP correct that mistake.

ALPA policy is clear: binding arbitration is final. No ifs, ands, or buts. For ALPA to try to change the arbitrator's ruling would be against ALPA policy, and therefore illegal. ALPA had no choice but to accept the arbitrator's ruling. Your beef should be with your own AAA reps, not ALPA.

 

[regionaltard]

they very well may be able to change the award via lawsuit...however, decertifying ALPA is once again not neccessary in order to win that lawsuit.

Would you mind sharing with us what you believe the grounds for overturning an arbitration award, any arbitration award, to be?

 

[SaturnPilot]

Would you mind sharing with us what you believe the grounds for overturning an arbitration award, any arbitration award, to be?

oh, I don't believe Nic should be overturned. In my opinion, the East went into Binding Arbitration knowing exactly what they were doing and should live by the result. That's why most carriers try to avoid as many arbitrations as possible...you never know what you are going to get. Charlie2 seems to think that they may win the lawsuit for the MDA guys and I was merely trying to point out decertifying your union has nothing to do with it.

 

[ultrarunner]

The highest authority to settle a dispute between two ALPA entities isn't Prater, isn't the EC, isn't the EB, isn't the rank-and-file pilots, it's the ABRITRATOR. Whether you or I think he ruled fairly is irrelevent. He's like the US Supreme Court for unions -- there is no appeal and no higher authority.

TWADude hit the nail on the head with the comment above.

And I suspect what happed is that post-Nic the USAir MEC felt so demoralized they never accepted they lost what they wanted. But such is life when you AGREE to 'binding arbitration'. And is purely academic at this point. And like TWADude said, unless you can PROVE corruption, the award is final.

So, the sooner the USAir pilots accept the fact their own MEC is to blame for letting them down by shooting for the moon and loosing, they better they will be.

Integrate your list, get a better contract, a better QOL, and press on!

But if any USAir pilot on here things they'll be represented better by the same MEC with a different uniform...well...too bad for you!

 

[charlie2]

We do accept the fact that our mec is to blame and he will NOT be in office with USAPA. Most of us don't think that Nic will change with a new union, although I think there is a chance it might be slighlty re-arranged because of the MDA lawsuit. I say slightly because it is only about 200 pilots from US Airways, not the CEL that got badly screwed.

 

[PlaneDrvr]

oh, I don't believe Nic should be overturned. In my opinion, the East went into Binding Arbitration knowing exactly what they were doing and should live by the result. That's why most carriers try to avoid as many arbitrations as possible...you never know what you are going to get. Charlie2 seems to think that they may win the lawsuit for the MDA guys and I was merely trying to point out decertifying your union has nothing to do with it.

I know guys who were involved in the whole MDA thing; and what you don't realize is that when the MDA guys 'win' their lawsuit, it will more than likely render the arbitrator's award "null and void." It will be determined that the arbitrator worked with a 'flawed' (incorrect list); and like the computer says, "garbage in garbage out" the end result cannot be determined to be valid. If any judge makes a ruling (criminal or civil), and it was later determined that the information/evidence used in making that ruling was 'flawed/invalid,' then the end ruling will NEVER hold up.

MDA was clearly "MAINLINE" US Airways, very clearly, and that is why the MDA pilots will win their suit. Just because the arbitrator 'incorrectly' determined (ruled) that it was Not mainline, does not make him correct. And, alpa national could have thrown out the arbitrator's ruling on that basis, that the 'list' was flawed because of the MDA situation. However, in do so, alpa national would have clearly been admitting that they 'screwed up' in even allowing the whole MDA thing to go on, and they already knew that they were facing litigation (liability) over the whole issue. Why do you thing that the MDA pilots are suing alpa National????

For what its worth.

DA

 

[PCL_128]

The MDA lawsuit will fail. Just like the TWA lawsuit will. And just like the RJDC lawsuit did. These lawsuits are nothing more than an expensive nuisance.

 

[PlaneDrvr]

My paycheck stub and W2 read "America West Airlines" -- but there is no more America West! How can this be? Answer: neither a paint job nor letterhead determine true employment status. Nice try.Nicolau can read a lot better than you can. He understood full well what MDA was. quote from Nicolau Award, Page 20:Barring any proof of impropriety no court will overturn an arbitrator's ruling, guaranteed. MDA was operated as a separate division and thus that's what it was. Thus the paint job, paystub, and union status aren't relevent.

So tell me, were the pilot who flew for the former "MetroJet" operation, "Mainline" US Airways??

I believe it was called the "MetroJet Division" of US Airways, and the airplanes all said on the side, "Operated by US Airways"

Were these pilots Mainline US Airways?? Just curious?

DA

 

[PlaneDrvr]

The MDA lawsuit will fail. Just like the TWA lawsuit will. And just like the RJDC lawsuit did. These lawsuits are nothing more than an expensive nuisance.

Tell me, 'ole wise one' just why do you believe that the MDA suit will fail??

Do you even know the entire situation?? I hear you on here talk all the time about 'scope,' well; with the MDA situation, alpa National allowed (even signed off on it) a Very obvious Violation of the 'scope clause' of the US Airways pilot (alpa) contract. What do you say to that?? Or, don't you know what you are talking about, (again)??

Knowing the issues involved in the MDA situation, i would say that their chances of winning are Very Good.

For what its worth.

DA

 

[PCL_128]

Read the Nic ruling. The logic is all there. But since you mentioned it, when ALPA "signs off" on something, it's no longer a scope violation. You can't violate something that's been approved.

 

[PlaneDrvr]

Read the Nic ruling. The logic is all there. But since you mentioned it, when ALPA "signs off" on something, it's no longer a scope violation. You can't violate something that's been approved.

Well, you Never answered my question, "why are you so certain (what facts do you have) the MDA pilots will lose their suit?"

Next qestion, 'of great wise one,' just suppose they do win their suit, and it is shown in that suit; that the arbitrator's "logic" and determination of the MDA pilot's status, was totally Incorrect? As it is a possibility that he (arbitrator) was wrong in that "logic" so what happens to the arbitrator's award in that situation??

And, if you would like to answer the question that I posed to the 'TWAdude'; Were the pilot who flew for the former MetroJet operation at US Airways 'Mainline pilots' As I said, it was always referred to as the "MetroJet division" of US Airways, and the planes all clearly stated on the side, "Operated by US Airways" Were they 'mainline' pilots?

And, maybe I did not state things clearly, my fault; but the original agreement that alpa 'signed off' on was Never followed, and operating the MDA aircraft the way they did constituted a violation of the contract on 'scope' very clearly. Again, why do you think the MDA pilots are suing alpa??

 

[PCL_128]

Well, you Never answered my question, "why are you so certain (what facts do you have) the MDA pilots will lose their suit?"

I did answer the question. You just didn't pick up on it. George Nicolau, the most experienced seniority integration arbitrator in the country, already looked at this situation and ruled on it. Your chances of getting a judge who is less experienced on these matters to come to a different conclusion when ALPA will certainly be presenting Nic's decision as evidence, well, let's just say that your chances aren't very good.

Next qestion, 'of great wise one,' just suppose they do win their suit, and it is shown in that suit; that the arbitrator's "logic" and determination of the MDA pilot's status, was totally Incorrect? As it is a possibility that he (arbitrator) was wrong in that "logic" so what happens to the arbitrator's award in that situation??

I'm not an attorney, and I haven't heard any ALPA attorneys comment on that possibility, so I can't make an educated guess on that. My suspicion is that nothing would happen automatically. You'd have to present the judge's ruling on that case to the judge in the East's lawsuit that seeks to vacate the award. But that's just my suspicion.

And, if you would like to answer the question that I posed to the 'TWAdude'; Were the pilot who flew for the former MetroJet operation at US Airways 'Mainline pilots' As I said, it was always referred to as the "MetroJet division" of US Airways, and the planes all clearly stated on the side, "Operated by US Airways" Were they 'mainline' pilots?

MetroJet wasn't being operated by furloughed pilots and flow-up pilots while other more senior furloughed pilots were bypassing. The situation is not analogous.

Again, why do you think the MDA pilots are suing alpa??

Because, just like Dan Ford, they aren't intelligent enough to work within the normal processes, so they try to cheat and make themselves rich off of the stolen dues of their fellow pilots. The only thing more despicable than suing your own union is SCABbing.

 

[TWA Dude]

We do accept the fact that our mec is to blame and he will NOT be in office with USAPA.

I'm curious then, since you acknowledge the blame on your MEC what exactly would you have preferred they did differently? It's a given that they should've revealed how Nicolau said DOH was a non-starter, but what would've the rank-and-file have done with that information?

In a conversation with one of the AWA Merger Commitee members he said he felt that if any of the AAA Merger Committee guys wavered on his demand for DOH they would've simply been replaced with someone who would. In other words, it was the will of the AAA pilots to fight for DOH and nothing less. So what I really want to know is exactly how your MEC failed you when all they did was seek what the rank-and-file wanted?

 

[TWA Dude]

So tell me, were the pilot who flew for the former "MetroJet" operation, "Mainline" US Airways??

Why do you ask such a silly question? Everybody knows the pilots could freely bid in or out of MetroJet just like everybody knows for MDA they couldn't. But I like your spunk. Keep trying.

 

[PlaneDrvr]

Why do you ask such a silly question? Everybody knows the pilots could freely bid in or out of MetroJet just like everybody knows for MDA they couldn't. But I like your spunk. Keep trying.

Well, you're missing the point, dude, the 'scope' clause of the CBA (contract) will determine if they were 'mainline' and if it is determined that they were; then they were 'denied' displacement/bidding rights, then the contract was violated. And, the point they are getting at is that alpa national, the mec and the company deliberately violated the contract, and alpa failed to represent/protect their rights under the contract; hence the lawsuit.

The point I was getting at is the MetroJet and MDA were operated the same way, so how can one be 'Mainline' and the other NOT be??? Can you answer that??

DA

 

[FR8mastr]

I agree...the guy above who resigned was on the BOD and he could have actually tried to fix these problems...instead he quit.

You mean like the PHL reps? They tried to fight for change on the inside and yet they were removed with false BS.

While this was happening you and other ALPA cheerleaders were all claiming how if the PHL reps could not swear unquestioning allegiance to ALPA then they should resign.

Well, which way do you guys really want it?

 

[PCL_128]

Simple: they weren't operated the same way. They were staffed in completely different ways, and that makes a big difference in an SLI situation.