AOL update
02-21-2013, 08:54 AM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Originally Posted by cactiboss
It is a very wide door except usapa has already been found guilty unanimously and the fact set has not changed. The Nic is still status quo and usapas pretext for changing just took a big step backwards with the mou.
A complete contract includes a seniority list. That is the clear intent behind the various legal decisions saying the case is not ripe unti a contract is presented. The point is that the court needs to see a seniority list in order to see if harm has been done and DFR has been breeched. USAPA needs to get a chance to argue what their "legitimate union purpose" is. Unti then, it appears to be a case of filing suit against hypothetical future actions, the very exact reason the first DFR case was thrown out.
02-21-2013, 09:02 AM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 139
Originally Posted by cactiboss
Lets see since the nicolau award came out the west has furloughed and downgraded while the east has hired and upgraded. Any more stupid questions?
02-21-2013, 09:04 AM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 449
That sounds like what the 9th said in laymans terms right there. The west can not prove they have been harmed until such time that a contract is in effect with an effective seniority list. At that point will all the realities come together. I would imagine, a 3 way combination of lists would trump AAA sitting as a single carrier with East and West still on seperate contracts and seniority lists.
I think I remember something in the 9th basically saying, just because you say the boogey man is going to come get you, you can't file the DFR. You can file the DFR when the boogey man finally gets you. I.E. Lets see the final list and that list invoked inside a joint contract, THEN we can determine if you have been harmed.
I think I remember something in the 9th basically saying, just because you say the boogey man is going to come get you, you can't file the DFR. You can file the DFR when the boogey man finally gets you. I.E. Lets see the final list and that list invoked inside a joint contract, THEN we can determine if you have been harmed.
02-21-2013, 09:39 AM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 449
Originally Posted by MayDaze
It's a good thing the east didn't downgrade and furlough before the Nic came out. That would have been unfair.
Funny I could have sworn the guy on my j/s the other day said he was furloughed for about a year in '07 or '08 somewhere in there...
02-21-2013, 09:45 AM
#95
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by crzipilot
That sounds like what the 9th said in laymans terms right there. The west can not prove they have been harmed until such time that a contract is in effect with an effective seniority list. At that point will all the realities come together. I would imagine, a 3 way combination of lists would trump AAA sitting as a single carrier with East and West still on seperate contracts and seniority lists.
I think I remember something in the 9th basically saying, just because you say the boogey man is going to come get you, you can't file the DFR. You can file the DFR when the boogey man finally gets you. I.E. Lets see the final list and that list invoked inside a joint contract, THEN we can determine if you have been harmed.
I think I remember something in the 9th basically saying, just because you say the boogey man is going to come get you, you can't file the DFR. You can file the DFR when the boogey man finally gets you. I.E. Lets see the final list and that list invoked inside a joint contract, THEN we can determine if you have been harmed.
02-21-2013, 10:08 AM
#97
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 449
Originally Posted by cactiboss
Except our current the TA says the Nic. Must be put in place once east and west are in a single contract which happens at por for sure. What would usapa's reason be to not follow the contract? Oh yeah, dfr
At POR isn't it moved from MOU to MTA? Then JCBA?
02-21-2013, 10:14 AM
#98
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by crzipilot
At POR isn't it moved from MOU to MTA? Then JCBA?
02-21-2013, 10:40 AM
#99
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 449
So the MOU leads to the MTA a new Transition Agreement? Which couldn't it be argued that this is a renegotiated TA which makes all previous null/void including status quo? dunno...... Just as others have said, think you guys are jumping the gun again, and trying to get to the end game before the end game is there. Hence another not ripe problem. As I said before, as the 9th said, UNTIL everything is in place, and voted in, THEN it can be looked at and seen IF the west is harmed at that point. Not before.
02-21-2013, 10:54 AM
#100
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by crzipilot
So the MOU leads to the MTA a new Transition Agreement? Which couldn't it be argued that this is a renegotiated TA which makes all previous null/void including status quo? dunno...... Just as others have said, think you guys are jumping the gun again, and trying to get to the end game before the end game is there. Hence another not ripe problem. As I said before, as the 9th said, UNTIL everything is in place, and voted in, THEN it can be looked at and seen IF the west is harmed at that point. Not before.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
