Originally Posted by
cactiboss
Are you that stupid? Read what you wrote and then read what usapa claims the mou does. Kirby saYs mou is not to deal with seniority, now usapa claims what? Oh yeah, mou does away with Nic. Is that what Kirby said the mou was suppose to do? Is that what usapa told the west mou would do? Btw, that was taken from a deposition not trial testimony.
No, I'm not stupid but from your posts I can't come to any other conclusion for you. You wrote this: "His deposition by the west lawyers he claims to know nothing about it." It took me about 30 seconds to find his statement that blew your BS out of the water.
YOU READ. Take the Nic glasses off and actually read the MOU. Match that to what Pauley testified to and you will see that they say the same thing. It was neutral in respect to US/AW seniority and did away with the TA(where the Nic resides) and leaves the final solution to the MB process. If it didn't how could you have sued?
Hummel was sworn in prior to his deposition. It was entered into testimony with the risk of perjury. You didn't answer my question. Why didn't you guys call Kirby to testify? He could have easily refuted Hummel's deposition. He was right around the corner. Things that make you go hmmmm.
The email string entered into evidence show that your leaders knew exactly what the MOU meant. That why you filed a lawsuit right after it was passed? Cut the crap.