Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
That's not how trials work. ALPA doesn't get to argue these facts again on appeal. An appeal is all about asserting that the judge erred somehow, there was jury misconduct, or some other procedural error. As far as this trial is concerned, the FACTS are all out. ALPA's only hope now is to delay, appeal, and hope for a smaller out of court settlement.
This verdict against ALPA is a clear and unambiguous showing of the unethical behavior of ALPA and ALPA legal. This unambiguous showing was handed down by an independent panel of jurors who did not have a dog in the fight. I know it's painful for the ALPA apologists to hear this, but it's the truth. You can call it an OJ jury or a Casey Anthony jury if it makes you feel better, but it's just a silly argument.
If this had been the only example of unethical behavior, you could almost try to look the other way. But it's not the only example. ALPA's and ALPA legal's attempt to bust their own in-house union of clerical workers had a similar result by the judiciary. I simply cannot imagine how so many of us are able to look the other way with such behavior and such failure.
Totally agree.
Carl
On the first point, I agree with the schematics of an appeal, but my point is, ALPA and TWA ALPA are two different entities. ALPA survived, and is the one being sued for TWAALAPA's decisions. It always goes that way. I am sure that this will drag on, and my point is that more facts/positions will come to light.
On the second point, I agree, and that was a very low point for ALPA, and imo totally unacceptable. There is a lot wrong with alpa, and I am the first to admit it, my point is that it is better to fix what we have. I know we disagree on this. Maybe someday we will see eye to eye.