USAPA: Downfall is coming from within!

[doh]

I asked this question on the other thread, and I'll ask it here. What is usapa going to do if they lose? It certainly looks like there is a good possibility of that at this point. What is their strategy going forward? MCDU is silent on this. So what about you other Easties?

Let me say that if I were in your shoes, I would not be happy. I'd be bitchin' like crazy. Hell, I might even have supported the lawsuit. But now that it looks like you could lose, it is time to get a strategy for negotiating a new contract. You can only lay in bed and skulk in curmudgeonly fashion for so long. If nothing else, your wife is going to kick you out so she can wash the sheets! Now somebody tell me you have a plan for negotiations going forward.

 

[UALjan15]

I asked this question on the other thread, and I'll ask it here. What is usapa going to do if they lose? It certainly looks like there is a good possibility of that at this point. What is their strategy going forward? MCDU is silent on this. So what about you other Easties?

Let me say that if I were in your shoes, I would not be happy. I'd be bitchin' like crazy. Hell, I might even have supported the lawsuit. But now that it looks like you could lose, it is time to get a strategy for negotiating a new contract. You can only lay in bed and skulk in curmudgeonly fashion for so long. If nothing else, your wife is going to kick you out so she can wash the sheets! Now somebody tell me you have a plan for negotiations going forward.

There is no need for a contingency plan. After all, they are "supremely confident" in their case going to appeal. Seham even told them that all of the case law is on their side and victory must follow. What more do they need? It is only a matter of time before the rest of the world is proven to be insane, and this travesty of injustice is reversed in their favor.

As for how long they can "lay in bed and skulk in curmudgeonly fashion," I think that depends on who you talk to. For the angry F/O club, it is a decade or more (or until they all upgrade). For the captains that have much more to lose by stonewalling, I honestly don't know--I thought that their patience would have run out more than a year ago. To stick up for a junior pilot group, at considerable expense to themselves, runs counter to basic pilot nature. So I'll give them props for that--if we could harness that unity into something productive (instead of just screwing the west), who knows what this group could acheive?

 

[T2Bus]

More info from "the inside".

You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em

Posted by TheEye at 5/16/2009 12:12 AM
Categories: uncategorized
We waited a few days after the unanimous jury verdict to absorb the reaction of the USAPA leadership. As the wick burned we clung to a glimmer of hope that just maybe the increasingly difficult position of Mr. Cleary’s delusional crusade would be publicly challenged by the silent east majority.

Sadly, this didn’t happen. Instead we heard the all too familiar whines we’ve come to expect from the failed USAPA leadership. They were quick to blame everyone but themselves. And with unbelievable gusto they continued their dishonest habit of promising future wins following devastating losses. They want you to continue funding their reckless campaign with the belief that victory will eventually be achieved under the sensible guise of Judge Robert’s Supreme Court.

USAPA’s illegitimately elected president penned a letter to the membership last Tuesday that nicely highlights the absurdity of 'the world is not fair' mantra. (TheEye’s comments are in red.)

[Note: Our comments do not represent the position or opinion of Leonidas LCC or the plaintiffs in the case. TheEye is an independent voice representing all US Airways pilots]

"The legal standard applicable to seniority integration issues is that a union may operate within a 'wide range of reasonableness.' Nevertheless, the court prohibited USAPA from telling the jury that every other unionized employee group on the property has applied DOH without any conditions and restrictions to protect the interests of their West counterparts."

The 'wide range of reasonableness' afforded unions is limited by a federally-mandated duty to fairly represent all members of the class and craft. When a union does not honor that duty members of that represented class and craft can file suit against a union in federal court, just as the plaintiffs did in this case. USAPA attempted to take extreme liberties with that 'wide range of reasonableness' and grossly crossed the line.

Mr. Cleary failed to acknowledge that the plaintiffs were bared from introducing the Delta/Northwest arbitration and other awards that employed a ratio or mechanical integration method. Further, none of the other work groups on property decertified their bargaining agents with the express purpose of cheating an arbitrated seniority award.

Mr. Clearly also failed to grasp that the integration methodology of other unions on property was utterly irrelevant to USAPA’s duty to fairly represent the west pilots.

"The Ninth Circuit, to whose precedent this court is obligated to defer, has held that DOH is inherently fair and equitable and 'well within' a wide range of reasonableness. Nevertheless, the court rejected USAPA’s request that the jury be instructed on this legal standard."

There are numerous court orders and references in the transcripts that allude to the fact that DOH is not inherently unfair. Going back to the relevancy question, the fairness of the Nicolau Award was not under adjudication. USAPA was only in court for its refusal to honor its Transition Agreement obligations in reference to the seniority integration process. In other words, the Association unilaterally disregarded the inherited Nicolau Award and replaced it with a new politically driven process that would terminate the career expectations of most west pilots with a feigned set of 'conditions and restrictions' drawn up to satisfy the casual observer.

"Existing legal precedent recognizes a union’s right to revisit a 'final and binding' seniority integration arbitration decision if the union has a principled objection to the result. Nevertheless, the court prohibited USAPA from presenting any evidence to the jury concerning the inequities of the Nicolau Award, both with respect to its disregarding of DOH and its violation of the arbitrator’s own rationale in treating Mid-Atlantic pilots as furloughees."

In reality, the majority of the Court’s time was spent revisiting the Nicolau Award as well as the east created 'impasse' following its publication. USAPA was afforded wide latitude by Judge Wake to discuss the disparate hire dates and alleged attrition loss as examples of the perceived unfairness of the Award by the east. Even though time was expended on this, Judge Wake was required to instruct the jury that they were not charged with determining the fairness of the Award. Their only charge was to determine whether USAPA was in breach of its duty to fairly represent the west pilots. To claim that an appeals court will allow a revisit of the Award is completely dishonest on Mr. Cleary’s part.

"The United States Supreme Court has held that, in order to establish that a union has engaged in bad faith conduct, there must be substantial evidence of fraud, deceitful action or dishonest conduct. Despite the fact that the plaintiffs alleged bad faith, the court rejected USAPA’s request that the jury be instructed on this legal standard."

Forming a union to circumvent a binding arbitration optimizes 'deceitful action' and 'dishonest conduct.'

"The court instructed the jury that USAPA was bound by the internal merger policy of a de-certified predecessor and prohibited USAPA from presenting evidence, including the West MEC’s legal brief authored by West merger attorney Jeff Freund in the inter-MEC litigation, that the Nicolau Award was nothing more than ALPA’s 'proposal.' "

ALPA had an obligation to defend the final and binding Award. Once USAPA failed to recognize the Award and bargain to place it into a joint contract, they violated their DFR. An out of context quote from Jeff Freund would only serve to confuse the jury and was irrelevant to the question before the Court.

"In the Breeger case, the North Carolina Federal Court looked at the same facts and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction because the negotiating process was still in flux. Same facts, different court, different result."

The above statement by Mr. Cleary is entirely false. According to the North Carolina Order, the facts in the Breeger case are different from those in this case. In the Breeger case, the complaint alleged that the Union’s seniority proposal was not in compliance with its constitution. In the Addington case, the DFR was primarily based on USAPA’s disregard for an inherited arbitration award, not a constitutional violation.

USAPA filed a RICO suit in North Carolina which was quickly dismissed with prejudice just six weeks later. Ironically, USAPA once stated that a Motion to Dismiss is notoriously difficult to win, yet the RICO defendants won their Motion to Dismiss on USAPA’s home turf and in record time.

Have you had enough of Mr. Cleary’s lies and empty promises? Have you had enough of Mr. Seham and his charlatan firm making millions off our hard earned dues dollars? Have you had enough of working for industry bottom wages and work rules while our CEO rakes in millions?

Of course you are. But unless your voice is heard with a clear call to end the hopeless appeal, you are along for a long and profitless journey.

Call your reps and tell them to stop the madness. Case law is clear and this verdict has virtually no chance of being overturned.

We can all stay at the bottom or we can face reality and fight for the achievable. Don’t let Mr. Cleary and Mr. Seham steal what is left of our careers.

The ball is in your court. Your silence will assure future failures.

 

[T2Bus]

At least ALPA is gone.

What else have they done to help all Airways pilots?

 

[Cowboy75]

How many West pilots are in good standing? They have no rights if Westies are a non union members in bad standing.

I'm supporting an organization that is looking out for my rights and it is not USAPA. My money and support go to Leonidas.


LEONIDAS MEETING
[FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Leonidas [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]has scheduled an informational meeting for former America West Airlines pilots. Meeting details are as follows: [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Scheduled for [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Wednesday June 10, 2009 [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Meeting will be held in PHX from 10am to 2pm (MST) at: [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Crowne Plaza Hotel [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]4300 East Washington Street [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Phoenix, AZ 85034 [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]NW Corner of Washington & 44[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]th [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Streets [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Attorneys Marty Harper and Andy Jacob[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana], our legal counsel from Polsinelli Shugart PC, will be the guest speakers. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Verdana]An open [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Question & Answer Forum [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]will follow the informational update. [/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]PLEASE BRING YOUR COMPANY I.D. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]TO ATTEND THE MEETING. [/FONT]
[/FONT]

 

[T2Bus]

Who has 10 million dollars? ​

It is estimated that USAPA lawyers will have that much by the time it is over in 2 years of appeals. In two years, we still won't have a contract.

Guys.... wake up and smell the coffee...for your family's well being. The lawyers don't need your money!

 

[T2Bus]

More info and questions from East Pilots:

Unbiased Facts - #14
June 8, 2009

Why does USAPA President Mike Cleary continue to publicly insult the
Honorable Neil Wake prior to the Judge’s ruling in the Addington trial
for injunctive relief and his ruling from the bench in pending class
action damages litigation where USAPA has been found guilty of DFR?

Who USAPA President Mike Cleary.

What Will USAPA’s communications style help or hurt the US Airways to
find a solution to the pilot group’s seniority integration problem?

When May 13 and June 4, 2009.

Why Judge Wake has an impressive background (listed below) and his
published works include the Arizona Appellate Handbook (Co-
Author) from 1980-1991.

How USAPA Communication Updates

Fact #1 USAPA Update – May 13, 2009

“(The court indicated) that USAPA failed in its duty to fairly represent
all of its members. Today’s decision, while disappointing, was not
unexpected. Since we were required to argue our case with limited time
and evidence and were hamstrung by questionable rulings and incorrect
instructions, USAPA, quite literally, fought this battle with both hands tied
behind its back. Given the circumstances, we have a hard time accepting
the idea that we encountered truly unbiased impartiality.”


Fact #2 USAPA Update – June 4, 2009

“USAPA President Mike Cleary put out a letter to the pilots yesterday,
wherein he stated, “… (it is) our position that the court effectively pre-
determined the result of the Addington litigation through its improper
exclusion of evidence and faulty jury instructions. As explained in “Why
We Appeal,” the very manner in which the Addington plaintiffs prevailed
in this first step will provide the basis for a reversal by the Ninth Circuit.”


Fact #3 Hon. Neil Vincent Wake Bio

Current Employment Position:

District Judge, since April 30, 2004

Bar Admissions

Arizona, 1974
U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, 1975
U.S. District Court District of Arizona, 1974
U.S. Supreme Court, 1977
U.S. Tax Court, 1976
Navajo Nation, 1978

Education

Harvard University Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1974 J.D.,
Doctor of Jurisprudence
Honors: magna cum laude
Law Review: Member, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review,
1972 - 1973
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, 1971
B.A., Bachelor of Arts
Honors: With High Distinction

Published Works

Arizona Appellate Handbook (Co-Author) 1980-1991

Honors and Awards

Phi Kapppa Phi
Best lawyers in America, Business Litigation, 1989 – 1990
Fellow of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, 1993 – Present

Source: Thompson Legal Record

For more information take a look at FindLaw.com and the Thompson
Legal Record:

http://pview.findlaw.com/view/1690590_1?channel=LP


Question #1 What purpose does it serve for USAPA President Mike Cleary to make
the following statement about Judge Wake’s courtroom? “Given the
circumstances, we have a hard time accepting the idea that we
encountered truly unbiased impartiality (in Judge Wake’s courtroom)?”

Question #2 Why does Cleary continue to publicly make statements like the one on
June 4, 2009 when he said, “(it is) our position that the court effectively
pre-determined the result of the Addington litigation through its improper
exclusion of evidence and faulty jury instructions?”

Conclusion What is the purpose of making statements about the Judge and his court
before he provides an order for injunctive relief and then hears
arguments in the class action trial where USAPA will once again be the
Defendant?


Subscribe: Unbiased Facts can send you an email notice of additions to the Unbiased
Facts web site. To subscribe to this service, send an email to
[email protected] and state subscribe in the subject line. To
unsubscribe, state unsubscribe in the subject line. If you have an article
you think should be published by Unbiased Facts, submit it to
[email protected] Check www.unbiasedfacts.org for updates.


End of the Unbiased Facts Update for June 8, 2009

Unbiased Facts Article 14, 2009

 

[Speedtape]

Lottery tickets are sold every day, no matter the odds, because, they offer HOPE!

Overturning an Arbitration decision is nearly impossible, unless gross prejudice can be shown. The odds of overturning are near ZERO (0)! You probably have a greater chance of winning a powerball Jackpot!

Sooner or later, the snake oil sales men will lose their following. Even most TV Evangelists have a limited life. If it was my money going into a dry hole, I would want an accounting for every penny.

The real question is: Are you better off today than you were 2 years ago? In 2 more years, will you be better off than today? Go buy a lottery ticket every week; you have a better chance of changing your life IF you should hit!

 

[T2Bus]

Another Suggestion to end the mess:





Op/Ed Hosted by Unbiased Facts
June 12, 2009

We Can Solve This Ourselves



By Guest Writer Vance Osmon


Let me propose a simple three-step solution that may provide a face-saving way
out of our present difficulties:

Many East pilots are fearful that they will be displaced by West pilots transferring
to East domiciles if the Nicolau Award is implemented. Let’s test that theory by
conducting a non-binding and anonymous mock bid sponsored by the Company to
quantify how many pilots (both East and West) actually intend to transfer. Results
of the mock bid may reveal that most East and West pilots have no intention to
vacate their present domicile and would thereby render any fear of displacement
unjustified. If the Company is not interested in conducting a mock bid, let's do it
ourselves.

Establish a mechanism within USAPA that would “meter” the flow of pilots
requesting to transfer to an “acceptable” level for a reasonable period of time, say
one year. Such a mechanism would not be contractually binding on USAPA, or
the Company, but would be established to address any lingering concerns pilots
may have about displacement. Pilots who desire to relocate and agree to the
strictures imposed by the USAPA program would be entitled to receive certain
financial incentives (provided by USAPA, or possibly the Company) to cover a
reasonable amount of the cost of relocation.

Sponsor a “Unity Summit” hosted by USAPA that would bring together union
leadership and the rank-and-file to discuss the needs and concerns of all US
Airways pilots. The goal of the summit would be to adopt an organizational and
negotiating strategy that would unite our pilot group; discussions would be
facilitated by specialists in conflict resolution, ethical behavior, and organizational
development.

It is quite likely that USAPA will fail in its attempt to overturn the results of the
Addington decision and many of the East pilots with whom I speak with have
reluctantly come to this conclusion. They are now focused on the next step in the
process: negotiating an “industry-leading” contract. I believe that USAPA should
abandon its ill-conceived and expensive legal strategy to overturn the Nicolau
Award and turn its attention to the twin goals of negotiating a new contract and to




prepare our pilot group for the next airline merger. Adopting the proposal as stated
above, or developing a reasonable alternative, is, in my opinion, the best way for
USAPA to begin the process of healing old wounds and for charting a course for
our future success.


Regards,


Vance Osmon
PHX Airbus F/O
247072

























Unbiased Facts can send you an email notice of additions to the Unbiased Facts web site. To subscribe to
this service, send an email to [email protected] and state subscribe in the subject line. To
unsubscribe, state unsubscribe in the subject line. If you have an article or “Quick Fact” you think should
be published by Unbiased Facts, submit it to [email protected] Check www.unbiasedfacts.org
for updates often

 

[Crzipilot]

A 1 year meter? is that like a fence? how 'about a 20 year meter??

A mock bid? pretty much useless....