USAPA wins appeal!!!!!!

[Fast43]

Spending 8 months on the Merger Comm back in the 90's is hardly a gravy train but I can see we'll just have a difference of opinion.

Yes I do - but I think you'll find many (concessionary) instances of min fleet deletion, pay cap increases, relaxed scope etc that have been negotiated by unions that allow furloughs to then take place .

Ok, Ive been wrong before but not as much as the wife says so.

Since you seem to know. could you tell me if in any of those instances the Union approached the Company and said we think you should Furlough some guys.

Or was it the other way around.

Fast

 

[Fast43]

Bucket,

Let's see.... "completely destroy the minority"??? OH! The drama of the westicle! Like being kicked in the westicles! Oh my goodness! What about DOH is even close to "completely destroyed?!?!?!?!?" EFF U!!!!!!

Now let's look at: "If the Company want's instant access to the receiving end of litigation, they'll accept your DOH dream list." Oh god....that's hilarious!!!! Yeah, I'm sure USAirways is running scared thinking about you and your super sharp lawyers taking them to judge wakeboard. Ya know, I'm not so sure....I liked you better when it seemed like you might not just be grasping at straws.

Now: "USAPA has been unable to prove....even slightly....that what they're attempting to do is legal." OMG....wait.....lemme catch my breath. THAT's really a stretch! USAPA is in compliance with a plethora of federal laws....all of them.....and was just vindicated of wrongdoing. Wake's courtroom was tainted. You will come to accept this in time. Your "victory" in his venue wasn't much to write home (to Bisbee) about.

And then the money thing.....like your mighty ALPA payscale is soooo much better than what ALPA negotiated for us. In the grand scheme, both of our contracts SUCK. If you had any experience at a real major airline you'd know this, but you're too proud to be working at Mesa Grande to see it.

U R A JOKE!!!!

BC,

Ok, maybe you could point this rookie to where it says anything about usapa being "vindicated of wrongdoing". Even spinmaster cleary has not made such a proclaimation. Could it be because the 9th did NOT rule on the merits. In fact didn't they say that if usapa DOESNT represent the west pilots FAIRLY the will face the pain of an unquestionably RIPE DFR. ie just like the one they just dismissed for being too early? They didn't say anything about it being incorrect in its finding of guilt.

As far as funding. No problem there at all. We make substancialy more than our counterparts over there, we can afford it easily. Don't confuse the request for usapa to pay Attorney fees as a sign that we can't. We just feel its better that those who caused this should pay for it. It is you and yours like you who are saying that making less than what Spirit went on strike for is just fine with you for a long time. "we are used to it etc."

You should be so pround, you bigshot Airline Pros are really showing the "Mesa Grande" crowd "what for" with that financial approach


Fast


Fast

 

[becket]

Bucket,

Let's see.... "completely destroy the minority"??? OH! The drama of the westicle! Like being kicked in the westicles! Oh my goodness! What about DOH is even close to "completely destroyed?!?!?!?!?" EFF U!!!!!!

Now let's look at: "If the Company want's instant access to the receiving end of litigation, they'll accept your DOH dream list." Oh god....that's hilarious!!!! Yeah, I'm sure USAirways is running scared thinking about you and your super sharp lawyers taking them to judge wakeboard. Ya know, I'm not so sure....I liked you better when it seemed like you might not just be grasping at straws.

Now: "USAPA has been unable to prove....even slightly....that what they're attempting to do is legal." OMG....wait.....lemme catch my breath. THAT's really a stretch! USAPA is in compliance with a plethora of federal laws....all of them.....and was just vindicated of wrongdoing. Wake's courtroom was tainted. You will come to accept this in time. Your "victory" in his venue wasn't much to write home (to Bisbee) about.

And then the money thing.....like your mighty ALPA payscale is soooo much better than what ALPA negotiated for us. In the grand scheme, both of our contracts SUCK. If you had any experience at a real major airline you'd know this, but you're too proud to be working at Mesa Grande to see it.

U R A JOKE!!!!

I'd love to wager a few bucks with you as to how successful usapa will be in their doh quest
But two FACTS preclude me from doing that:


1. Because you make less money than striking Spirit pilots, you don't have money to bet.

2. Even if you had the cash, you no-integrity scabs can't be trusted to uphold your agreements.

My guess is your a 99 hire who for whatever reason was unable to get hired at a real airline after your furlough ib 01. The majority of your colleagues were able to move on to real careers...what's wrong with you that you thought us air was going to work out for you this time? Could it be you thought you were going to be able to waltz in off the street into a very senior position to an airline {that saved your dead airlines ass} that you never worked for?

your pay and work rules are NEVER going to improve until you accept reality. IfAOL files with SCOTUS doug has no reason to talk to you for 3 years min. Nothing the nmb can do about it either...this is called square 1. At a minimum, the next 2 years will look like the past 2. Remember when usapa promised you a contract in 90 days? What happened?

You'll get a contract when AOL Allows you one. That's a fact.

 

[Guppiedriver]

Thankfully, USAPA was founded NOT as a means of overturning this debacle, but because of the massive, repeated, and non-stop failures of the ALPA gravy train boys who had long since forgotten that they had a real job to do: representing pilots!

Apparently you didn't read the "smoking gun" letter between Bradford and a lawyer that contradicts your statement.

USAPA's Conditions and Restrictions provide generous protections that you should at least consider. In fact, with the number of east pilots still living near your only base, your life will likely be less disrupted with the C&R's than with Nic. Fences make good neighbors, too. Some food for thought.

Could you post the conditions and restrictions for everyone to see? I read them a few times and I'm not seeing how wonderful they are. Be sure to highlight the upgrade formula and explain what that means to a west pilot. Also, don't forget the furlough clause, that one is especially unbiased.

 

[BeCareful!]

Fast: the case was dismissed. No wrong doing. Once dismissed for ripeness they don't continue ruling. "Fairly" does not necessarily mean including the windfall you are seeking. Four words: Wide Range of Reasonableness.

Bucket: at 1330 you shouldn't be drinking and posting. Good god man, get a life. America On Line has nothing to do with this!

Guppie: one man's opinion (even if it's Bradford's) isn't the whole story. Even if it were, nothing changes. You are just as capable of posting the C&R's as am I, so feel free to do so and highlight whatever you wish.

 

[Groucho]

The following question and answer format was taken from the members only section of the USAPA web site. The heading and closing on the article says that this information comes from USAPA legal.

Q. USAPA says it’s not bound by the results of the arbitration; why then would the Company be bound by the results of the LOA 93 arbitration, or any arbitration?
A. The Nicolau arbitration was binding on the parties to it and then only with respect to finalizing a proposal. ALPA remained free to modify or even abandon Nicolau, just as the Ninth Circuit recognized: “We note, as the district court recognized, that USAPA is at least as free to abandon the Nicolau Award as was its predecessor, ALPA.” USAPA was not a party to the Nicolau arbitration, nor were the two pilot groups, each of which was entitled to exercise its veto power in the context of contract ratification. The Ninth Circuit recognized that each pilot group had the right exercise this type of veto.

Q. The majority comment “under pain of” makes it sound like the moment the pilots ratify a contract that does not contain the Nicolau award, it would be a ripe violation of the duty of fair representation; is this true?
A. Not at all. This comment is found in footnote 1. It merely points out that USAPA must negotiate a contract “with the interests of all members” in mind. That merely states the applicable DFR standard and is a point which USAPA has never disputed. The Ninth Circuit’s observation is placed in proper context by the comments that lead up to the “pain” comment:
“forced to bargain for the Nicolau award, any contract USAPA could negotiate would undoubtedly be rejected by its membership … we leave USAPA to bargain in good faith pursuant to its DFR, with the interest of all members - both East and West - in mind …”
And outside of the footnote, in the regular body of the decision, the Ninth Circuit made it clear that USAPA is presumably free to negotiate and ratify a contract that does not include Nicolau when it said: “Additionally, USAPA’s final proposal may yet be one that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award.

Q. So what would a lawsuit that really is ripe have to prove once there is a contract?
A. That USAPA had acted in a wholly irrational or arbitrary manner. Under law, USAPA cannot be held liable if it engages in the good faith pursuit of a reasonable basis for resolving the seniority integration issue in the interest of advancing the interests of the entire bargaining unit.

Q. Doesn’t the TA direct the Company to use the Nicolau award and/or ALPA’s seniority proposal? Why is USAPA not bound to this, regardless of what the Court rules?
A. ALPA was bound by its own internal policy to propose Nicolau, but it was not bound to forego negotiation of a ratifiable agreement, nor were the pilots bound to ratify any agreement incorporating the Nicolau Award. As the Ninth Circuit recognized: “We note, as the district court recognized, that USAPA is at least as free to abandon the Nicolau Award as was its predecessor, ALPA.”


Q. Isn’t the Company liable if they agree to a contract that doesn’t include the Nicolau award?
A. No. Both USAPA and the Company have the right to negotiate, or re-negotiate, the terms of any collectively bargained agreement provided that they do not proceed in a wholly irrational or arbitrary manner.


USAPA Legal

 

[clr4theapch]

Stop the TOS violations... read on..

We are getting more complaints about the scab talk on this thread.. many people are getting tired of it... the mods are getting tired of all the reports..

We realize and understand that we have allowed more than the"normally" acceptable discussions in this area due to the Ongoing "Spirit" stike... most believe this is productive and prudent as it relates to the times we live..

With that.. The mods are now asking you all to stop the "scab" calling name calling, use of any persons names on this or any other thread not related to the "current" Spirit action... and we have our limits there already posted..

We do not wish to read this entire thread and start chopping large sections of posts from it.. so PLease don't force our hand in doing so... lets just stop it right here, right now!!

Thanks for your cooperation..

 

[Guppiedriver]

Fast: the case was dismissed. No wrong doing. Once dismissed for ripeness they don't continue ruling. "Fairly" does not necessarily mean including the windfall you are seeking. Four words: Wide Range of Reasonableness.

Bucket: at 1330 you shouldn't be drinking and posting. Good god man, get a life. America On Line has nothing to do with this!

Guppie: one man's opinion (even if it's Bradford's) isn't the whole story. Even if it were, nothing changes. You are just as capable of posting the C&R's as am I, so feel free to do so and highlight whatever you wish.

One man's opinion? He was the founder of USAPA. Without his effort, USAPA would not exist.

Since you are the one that said that we should consider a DOH list with USAPA's wonderful C&R's, I want you to explain how they protect west pilots.

 

[Lear70]

CLR beat me to it.

The next person to use the term "Scab" when it clearly does NOT apply (as in someone who crossed an active picket line and is on "the list") will get a 3 day suspension.

The next person who does it after that gets 10 days.

The next person... a month.

The next... permanent ban.

Enough.

I understand that, for those of you who are personally involved and affected by this fight, it's personal, it's close to home, and it's angering. Both sides. I'm not taking sides one way or another. We're simply saying that the name calling, especially *THAT* name, is going to stop.

Thanks,

/mod

 

[BeCareful!]

CLR beat me to it.

The next person to use the term "Scab" when it clearly does NOT apply (as in someone who crossed an active picket line and is on "the list") will get a 3 day suspension.

The next person who does it after that gets 10 days.

The next person... a month.

The next... permanent ban.

Enough.

I understand that, for those of you who are personally involved and affected by this fight, it's personal, it's close to home, and it's angering. Both sides. I'm not taking sides one way or another. We're simply saying that the name calling, especially *THAT* name, is going to stop.

Thanks,

/mod

Lear70,

That's fantastic news. I applaud your proactive stance on this. As blue collar laborers, we should protect the definition of that word and not let it creep toward a meaningless, catch-all for people who just want to spout off at others they don't agree with.

Thank you.