USAPA Runoff election

[TWA Dude]

USAPA doesn't represent the "east" or "west". It represents the pilots of US Airways.

Wrong. Simply being the official collective bargaining agent doesn't equal fair representation.

In any case, it's for the jury to decide. Do you honestly feel USAPA has a good chance of winning? Have you wondered why Judge Wake put the trial on the fast-track when DFR litigation normally takes seven years or more? Who other than attorney Seham agrees that changing unions voids binding arbitration? Have you bothered to ask? I did: a prominent labor attorney who has the Teamsters as one of his major clients. I feel pretty good about the West's chances going into the trial.

 

[TWA Dude]

(AP) -- Pilots at US Airways Group Inc. say the company has rejected their request to bring in the National Mediation Board to help them reach an agreement.

No surprise here. The company knows negotiations are going nowhere until the DFR issue is resolved.

 

[Bringupthebird]

USAPA doesn't represent the "east" or "west". It represents the pilots of US Airways.

How many times has the leadership of USAPA come to PHX to meet with their constituents?

How many times have they had to appear in court in PHX?

Which number is larger?

Now go back and try to convince us of the truth of your original statement.

 

[AutoBus]

How many times has the leadership of USAPA come to PHX to meet with their constituents?

How many times have they had to appear in court in PHX?

Which number is larger?

Now go back and try to convince us of the truth of your original statement.

They are too yellow to come to PHX, Remember the chicken yellow lanyards?

 

[johnnyb]

You're right. A judge can't dictate what USAPA does with its C&BLs or CBAs. What he can do is issue an injunction ordering $1 million a day fine as long as USAPA continues to fail to represent the West. Who do you think is smarter: Judge Wake or counselor Seham?

Glad to see you DO understand ' the letter ' and its implications. After all, if the lists are ordered merged and the powers that be implement LOA 93 ( as already threatened) what are you going to do about it?

Since the judge has already dismissed the dues refund idea as punitive and not supported by case law - you are really reaching on fines. But you'll be paying your own fines anyway as an assessment ..

 

[TWA Dude]

After all, if the lists are ordered merged and the powers that be implement LOA 93 ( as already threatened) what are you going to do about it?

If we lose the court case(s) we'll have no more leverage and all will be lost. Won't be anything for me to do.

Since the judge has already dismissed the dues refund idea as punitive and not supported by case law - you are really reaching on fines.

Non sequitor. (That means one has nothing to do with the other.) If we win the suit fines are obviously one way for the judge to correct the DFR issue.

But you'll be paying your own fines anyway as an assessment ..

If you really think Judge Wake is stupid enough to make the winners of a suit pay the loser's fine I guess you believe everything Seham tells you too.

 

[FDJ2]

But you'll be paying your own fines anyway as an assessment ..

Are non members required to pay union assessments?

 

[PHXFLYR]

According to their C&B/L's ? Yes. According to the LMRA ? I'm not sure....

PHXFLYR

 

[Bringupthebird]

LOA won't be thrust on the west. Mgt wants to keep USAPA at the end of an 11 foot pole.

 

[PHXFLYR]

No they don't. They want to give them just enough rope to hang themselves with so they can watch them twist in the wind.


PHXFLYR

 

[BeCareful!]

No they don't. They want to give them just enough rope to hang themselves with so they can watch them twist in the wind.


PHXFLYR

The supposed animosity management has for USAPA according to life here in the FI.com world puzzles me. I sense no more or less contempt than management had for ALPA.

Do you think they want ALPA back because of the 24/7 concession stand, or do you guys honestly think Doug has a soft spot for you west flyers and wants to see you get your seniority wishes granted?

 

[FDJ2]

According to their C&B/L's ? Yes. According to the LMRA ? I'm not sure....

PHXFLYR

A non member is a non member, how can they be subject to the C&BLs of an Association they are not members of? Contract maintenance fees, sure, representational costs sure, but assessments due to a failure to properly represent them? That's a stretch.

 

[Bringupthebird]

The supposed animosity management has for USAPA according to life here in the FI.com world puzzles me. I sense no more or less contempt than management had for ALPA.

Do you think they want ALPA back because of the 24/7 concession stand, or do you guys honestly think Doug has a soft spot for you west flyers and wants to see you get your seniority wishes granted?

OPEN YOUR EYES

ALPA was never in front of as many federal Judges is as short a period of time as USAPA has. They realize that associating with such a corrupt organization puts them perilously close to collusion, hence the desire to keep them at a significant distance. Not to mention that USAPA proves themselves to be complete amatuers at running a union and need not be taken seriously.

While ALPA was a significant advesary, they didn't often put the company at the risk of being sued.

 

[Bringupthebird]

A non member is a non member, how can they be subject to the C&BLs of an Association they are not members of? Contract maintenance fees, sure, representational costs sure, but assessments due to a failure to properly represent them? That's a stretch.

The union decides (within fairly narrow limits) which fees are germain. A non-memeber could drag them into court and dispute it, I suppose.

 

[Ocity]

The union decides (within fairly narrow limits) which fees are germain. A non-memeber could drag them into court and dispute it, I suppose.

USAPA can count on another lawsuit over their self imposed germane expenses.

 

[FDJ2]

The union decides (within fairly narrow limits) which fees are germain. A non-memeber could drag them into court and dispute it, I suppose.

I'm pretty sure of it. Non members can be required to pay representational costs, but the union has to itemize and account for those costs. They must involve costs associated with maintaining or negotiating a contract. I hardly think paying of fines for failing to represent non members fairly meets that threshold.

 

[BeCareful!]

OPEN YOUR EYES

ALPA was never in front of as many federal Judges is as short a period of time as USAPA has. They realize that associating with such a corrupt organization puts them perilously close to collusion, hence the desire to keep them at a significant distance. Not to mention that USAPA proves themselves to be complete amatuers at running a union and need not be taken seriously.

While ALPA was a significant advesary, they didn't often put the company at the risk of being sued.

Oh...big letters.....must be true, and important. Your take on this is laughable. USAPA is in fact conducting day-to-day business in much the same way any union does. (Witness the recent screw up in the west schedules and the resulting action.) You can take them just as non-seriously as you wish, but it doesn't make your allegations true, nor does it change anything. Yeah, it's a new organization and a work in progress. So-the-f&%#-what? You boys are so g'damn critical of everything USAPA does, totally ignore the hard work that's been done and continues (yes, even on your hateful behalf) and yet you're telling me to open my eyes? Whatever, we all know why you behave like that; if I had an un-cashed winning lottery ticket, I'd be squirrly too.

Corruption? Collusion? With the pension investigation gaining momentum, we'll soon see who's corrupt, and my strong suspicion is that ALPA has a lot of dirt on its hands in this one.

But whatever, you probably know best since you're west and all. That's how it goes here on FI.com

 

[AutoBus]

Oh...big letters.....must be true, and important. Your take on this is laughable. USAPA is in fact conducting day-to-day business in much the same way any union does. (Witness the recent screw up in the west schedules and the resulting action.) You can take them just as non-seriously as you wish, but it doesn't make your allegations true, nor does it change anything. Yeah, it's a new organization and a work in progress. So-the-f&%#-what? You boys are so g'damn critical of everything USAPA does, totally ignore the hard work that's been done and continues (yes, even on your hateful behalf) and yet you're telling me to open my eyes? Whatever, we all know why you behave like that; if I had an un-cashed winning lottery ticket, I'd be squirrly too.

Corruption? Collusion? With the pension investigation gaining momentum, we'll soon see who's corrupt, and my strong suspicion is that ALPA has a lot of dirt on its hands in this one.

But whatever, you probably know best since you're west and all. That's how it goes here on FI.com

Critical of USAPA? why shouldn't we be? It was formed soley for the purpose of stealing seniorty from the west pilots.

You can dream about your DOH all you want, bottom line roughly relative seniority is ALPA merger policy, roughly relative seniorty is what you got in the NIC!


Oh by the way, DOH MEANS NOTHING!

 

[MCDU]

Oh by the way, DOH MEANS NOTHING!-Screams the PFT crowd of the 90's. Its all about Me, Me, Me and how a Westhole can leapfrog 20 years of service. A probation pilot being senior to someone who has 17 years of service will not fly. Sorry PFTrainers.

When the Nic list came out, it was not even close to relative seniority. 1/3 of the pilot list was not included. Active USAIR pilots were listed as furloughed.

M

 

[BeCareful!]

Critical of USAPA? why shouldn't we be? It was formed soley for the purpose of stealing seniorty from the west pilots.

You can dream about your DOH all you want, bottom line roughly relative seniority is ALPA merger policy, roughly relative seniorty is what you got in the NIC!


Oh by the way, DOH MEANS NOTHING!

Wrong. First off, west pilots have never had the "seniority" they claim is being stolen from them. Only in your minds and in the botched abortion that Nicolau rendered using inaccurate lists (thanks ALPA). Second, it took years of unsatisfactory performance of ALPA to get their bickering, no-account asses off our property. Other airlines will learn this lesson eventually, too. In fact, I seem to remember AWA trying to rid themselves of the scorge. Of course, with the NIC you'd be so g'damn senior, well then who cares, ALPA would be fine with anyone who suddenly had 1100 pilots under them who'd been with the company much longer.

But finally, where in my previous post did ever mention seniority, Nic, any of it? You're just another little FI.com bitch that keeps harping and harpng on this. Whatever happens ain't up to you, it ain't up to me, it ain't even up to your boy Wake, who I'm beginning to think you guys have already paid off since you're so sure he's going to deliver you your leapfrog furlough proof positions on our list.

Just how much did it take to buy Judge Wake's ruling in advance like that?