Originally Posted by
PurpleTurtle
Truthfully opinions in opposition to the Nicolau are of little relevance, as the Nicolau simply does not exist in any contract and can have no relevance at all apart from a contract. Ignorance, opposition, or ambivalence about the Nic have no impact on it. It was always and remains dead apart from a contract. The burden is on those who have a nostalgia for it, and who wish for it to someday be included in a contract.
I expect the West will be offered a merger committee pursuant to the Protocol Agreement. The 9th appeal will be dismissed with prejudice at AOL's request, and the Nic will remain absent from the employment data and thus excluded from the status quo. Or the West can refuse to participate and continue to pursue their lawsuits, and continue Liberty Tie sales.
I predict the West will NOT get a seat due to Federal Law and the court ruling out in AZ. The arbitrators due NOT make awards contrary to Federal Law/Courts. It opens up their ranks to the widening of the "manifest disregard" standards in the courts.
http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra....&context=hlelj
You may wish to do some reading by Ira Jaffe, one of our arbitrators in the SLI. Statutory law (and rulings thereof) can cause manifest disregard to establish growing cracks in the arbitration system thereby causing problems for their system of dispute resolution. In short, they become untrustworthy.
This is a matter of external law ...
"Second are claims of contractual breach, where external law is incorporated by agreement of the parties or where external law is cited by one or both parties as an aid for the interpretation and application of ambiguous contractual language. Arbitral use of external law as an aid to interpreting ambiguous contract language is little more than a specific application of the general contract law principle that,where two constructions of contract language exist,
one lawful and the other unlawful, it is presumed that the parties intended the lawful course of action, and construction of the agreement consistent with law is favored. Incorporation of external law into the agreement evidences the parties' joint intention that the claimed violations of external law also violate the agreement and are to be adjudicated and en- forced through the grievance and arbitration procedures. Since the arbitrator is furthering the intent of the parties,
there can be no serious objection to arbitral consideration of external law."
Judge Silver ruled in Federal Courts that the West does not have participant status under McCaskill-Bond and if the Appeals Court supports this premise it could very well cut WIDE OPEN the SLI in the future award if it is disregarded by the PAB.
I'm looking forward to the pilots here to continue to "slit their own throats" by simply disregarding the tried a true method and reasons that unions have promoted since the late 1800's. DOH with LOS adjustment. Period.
Labor never learns.