Why East Pilots are mad

[BeCareful!]

Everyone in the industry is sorry that usair management took a good thing in the 80's and proceeded to screw it up so royally for the next 20 years. Everyone gets why the pilots are mad. What no one agrees with is trying to steal back lost careers from another pilot group.

No one is trying to steal anything. No one is asking or even suggesting that one of your young captains fly with one of our FO's. The NIC, undiluted with a reasonable fence as it is, would place some of you insulting whipper snappers in the left seat barking "gear up, grandpa!" to people who don't deserve that. You guys act like such holes on here and you wonder why there's resistance. Jesus....what unckle muckers.

TWA....that's mighty big of you to be willing to give the NIC a try. I'll bet there would be guys junior to you who were captains here when you got hired at TWA.

In any case, y'all have fun wearing out your keyboards trashing anyone with a different viewpoint. Maybe if you spend enough time on the Internet it will all go away.

 

[TWA Dude]

No one is trying to steal anything.

Sorry but that's not true. Nicolau decided the new seniority list by mutual agreement. The East's failed attempt to get something better than the Nicolau list means the West would get something worse. That is stealing.

TWA....that's mighty big of you to be willing to give the NIC a try.

Oh come on, you've read what Marty MCDU has written. He deserves all the derision he gets.

I'll bet there would be guys junior to you who were captains here when you got hired at TWA.

So? My furlough job was at Trans States and in fact I did fly as captain to FOs who'd been my captain at TWA. Sad, but that's the harsh reality of this industry.

The current USAirways is a brand new airline formed from two previous ones. At the time of the merger the bottom active pilot at US Airways was a junior pilot no matter how many years longevity nor what seat he previously occupied. You can't be both senior AND junior, right? So why should a junior pilot at USAirways be put senior to a junior pilot at AWA? To see the answer to this question and more please re-read the Nicolau award.

 

[Ocity]

Sorry but that's not true. Nicolau decided the . At the time of the merger the bottom active pilot at US Airways was a junior pilot no matter how many years longevity nor what seat he previously occupied. You can't be both senior AND junior, right? So why should a junior pilot at USAirways be put senior to a junior pilot at AWA? To see the answer to this question and more please re-read the Nicolau award.

C'mon T-way. Logic and irrefutable, Fact-based reality has no business being discussed with an East guy. It's their personal kryptonite. The can't handle it.

 

[PHXFLYR]

.......................

 

[hockeypilot44]

You know, my one year old daughter doesnt whine as much as the Easties

- Former AWA Dispatcher, fight the good fight!!!!

As a pilot working for another airline, I feel that way about the America West pilots. Every time, I jumpseat on America West, I have to hear their side of the story again. As someone who doesn't care, I want to say STFU, but I don't because I am grateful for a ride. When I ride on the East airplanes, they don't even bring it up and neither do I.

 

[xanderman]

Find that quote yet MCDU?

 

[UALjan15]

When I ride on the East airplanes, they don't even bring it up and neither do I.

Of course they don't--they know the rest of the industry lost all respect for them when they turned there back on binding arbitration. There aren't a lot of sympathetic ears out there to whine to. Does a Catholic priest bring up in sermon how much fun he has with your sons?

 

[Carl S.]

99+% of jumpseaters are going to say how it is going, if they care I do not know. They are not going to disagree strongly with a crew that is giving them a ride. Do you tell your host at dinner that it sucked? I do not think so. All this jumpseat talk or no talk is pure B.S. Just get your facts from your local PACER account before any side gets to manipulate it. The truth will set you free young grasshopper!

 

[Cowboy75]

PHOENIX DOMICILE UPDATE


May 29, 2009​

The Federal Judicial System​

The Appeals Process​

The losing party in a verdict by a trial court in the federal judicial system normally is entitled to appeal the decision to a federal court of appeals. In a civil case, either side may appeal the decision. In the case of Addington, et al v USAPA, the trial court was the District Court of Arizona. This district court is located in the middle region of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the appeal would be reviewed by the 9th Circuit Court located in San Francisco, California.


The following are some fact only bullet points of the Federal appeals process.

A litigant who files an appeal is known as an "appellant."

In this appeals case, the appellant will be USAPA.

In the trial court, USAPA is known as defendant.

​

A litigant defending against the appeal is known as the "appellee."

In this appeals case, the appellee will be Addington, et al.

In the trial court, Addington, et al is known as Plaintiff.

​

Typically, the first step is to file a notice of appeal in the district (trial) court where the case was decided.

Normally, the appellant must file an appeal within 30 days of issuance of the final court order1 in the case.
The district court informs the court of appeals and other parties involved.
In a civil appeal, the district court may require appellant to file a surety bond (Fed. R. App. P.7).

This bond or other tangible security may be necessary to guarantee payment of costs on appeal.


​

A three judge panel from the appeals court works together to make a decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court.

Judges are assigned to panels randomly.

The panel can include judges from a variety of sources including:

A senior circuit or district judge.

The district judge can be from a district court within the particular circuit, and/or
A visiting circuit or district judge from another circuit.

​

It is important to note that the appellate court "does NOT receive additional evidence" or hear witnesses.
Factual findings of the trial court may also be reviewed by the court of appeals.

However, overturning a lower court's decision based on factual grounds occurs only if the findings were "clearly erroneous."

​

The appellant has the burden to prove that the trial court made a substantial legal error that affected the decision in the case.

Legal arguments are offered to the panel by the appellant in a written document called a "brief."
Through the brief, the appellant tries to convince the judges of an error in the trial court and petition to have this decision reversed or remanded back for a new trial in the district (trial) court.

​

The appellee files a reply brief to demonstrate that the trial court gained the correct outcome.

If an error was committed by the trial court, the appellee brief will explain why the error was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.

​

The appeals court can make a decision based on written briefs only. However, many times, the court will hear oral arguments.

The appeals court generally requests oral argument in slightly more than 50 percent of appeal cases.
During oral argument, a structured discussion of the disputed legal principles occurs between the appellate attorneys and the judges.
The appellant and appellee are typically given 15 minutes to present oral arguments to the court.
In certain cases, the oral arguments will be heard en banc which means by a larger group of judges than the original 3. Most times, en banc arguments will be heard by all2 the judges of the particular circuit.

As of 2009, there are 29 authorized judgeships to the 9th Circuit.
As a matter of course, it is generally rare to have en banc review in any of the 12 circuits.

​

Oral arguments are open to the public.

The 2nd and 9th Circuit will review requests to allow for electronic and photographic coverage of oral arguments.
The 7th, 8th, and 9th Circuits make available Internet digital recordings of oral arguments.

​

The court of appeals decision is normally the final ruling in a case although there are exceptions.

The decision is normally accompanied by an opinion explaining the courts rationale.

A decision may be reached by a 3-0 or 2-1 vote.
A decision will take into account and apply any relevant precedents and similar cases already decided by that court, or by the U.S. Supreme Court.

​

The court of appeals can send the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings.

Recent history of the 9th Circuit provides approximately a 5-10 percent chance of overturning a decision originally made by the trial court.

​

A party in the case, either the appellant or appellee, can request the Supreme Court to hear the case.

Party requesting Supreme Court review is required to file Writ of Certiorari (pronounced sƏr-shee-Ə-rair-ee) or "Cert" for short.
Certs narrow or limit the scope of Supreme Court appeal jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court "will agree to hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently."
Only 1-2 percent of Certs are granted annually by the Supreme Court.

​

Based on data from the 2007 Annual Report of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the total median time from filing an appeal to final disposition in appellate court was 18.6 months.

2006 statistics were only slightly better at 15.5 months
2008 court statistics have yet to be released.
Compared to the other circuit courts, the appeals process of the Ninth Circuit takes 20-25 percent longer due to the higher case load.
Once an appeal case is fully briefed, Ninth Circuit judges decided cases fairly rapidly. In 2007, final disposition of the appeals court occurred in .2 months for a case submitted on briefs and 1.2 months for a case in which oral arguments were heard.

​

Notes:

1 It appears that in this particular case, the 30 day requirement will be waived due to the different time lines of injunctive relief (scheduled order delivered in late-June 2009) and a jury trial for damages (not officially scheduled; Possibly late August 2009). Plaintiffs – Appellees have already filled motion with no objection in district court.
2 Unique to the 9th Circuit Court, because of its larger size relative to other circuits, a "limited en banc" review would be called of a randomly selected 15 judge panel versus the full court.

Sources of Fact Information:

Understanding the Federal Courts, http://www.uscourts.gov/understand03/content_1_0.html

The 2007 Annual Report of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/publicat...Report2007.pdf

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/rules/FRAP/Rules_TOC.htm
__________________

 

[Scope out RJ's]

Where do you work again?

Good question!
Some of MCdoosh's greatest hits:


Marty saying he doesn’t work for US Air.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=848465#post848465

Marty saying he has nothing to do with this merger

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=848322#post848322

Marty claiming to be a UAL pilot.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?p=1224345#post1224345

So, where do you work doosh?
Or is this just more hot air from you Us Air east lover?
You better go out and supplement that Gulfstream pay McDoosh, your man may soon be out of a job!:laugh: