eaglefly

All correct as it is what the MOU provides for and (most importantly) what USAPA agreed to. The confusion lies in equating USAPA as a recognized bargaining agent with "East pilots" as a sub-group in this SLI. I think East pilots will have the opportunity to argue their position in a SLI discussion among at least three parties after they're first handed their hat by a court and USAPA as a recognized agent is dispatched to the happy hunting ground.

The problem isn't the supposed leopard whose spots were known and shown for all to see before anyone agreed to the MOU, but the jackal that keeps attacking anything and everything in its path.

eaglefly

All she did was punt, because she knew where it would go. She was looking to punt from the beginning. With no actual harm YET, that was easy. APA will punt to the arbitrators to minimize any DFR and IMHO, neither pure East desires nor the Nic will be used. If you think about it, that's probably the result that would have happened had both sides compromised in the first place. Both sides will be ****ed and thats how you know the proper outcome was achieved.

SewerPipeDvr

This is correct. Judge Silver kicked the can down the road. I have looked briefly over the filings. East was mostly bluff and bullshiete, trying to get something to stick. APA was actually a bit thin and timid. The Company's reply was killer. Siegal won this hands down. He had facts and law down pat. Clearly what is going on is USAPA trying to get everything they can for their side (East). Get the money (agree to anything just get the cash now) and then try to get higher seniority numbers with legal attacks. I don't expect this to work out for them. Unless the Judge gets POed they won't lose anything but court cost and legal fees. But I must say it is a rather clumsy attempt. Dismissed without fanfare. USAPA will melt away. APA will try to shaft USAir pilots without getting into hot water. Life will go on. Personally if I was still flying I would be much more worried about Russia sending 6.5 million barrels of oil to China and not using petro dollars. That will make the cost of a barrel of oil go through our roof. What will ten dollar a gallon JetA do to the industry? Now it better be all about seniority numbers.

cactiboss

I thought binding arbitration by a neutral was a compromise? I guess the west must compromise on the compromise? If the west gets a voice there is no doubt the Nic will be presented by our side. Us/Awa merged in 2005 and the Nic reflects the equities in place in 2005. Do you think for one minute the arbitrators will take an east/west snap shot of December 9th 2013? I doubt that very much.

eaglefly

If the APA is to "shaft" anyone, it would mean they would have to argue that group X should be awarded Y in the merge, but more importantly the arbitrators would have to agree. It's easy to say APA might shaft somebody, but harder saying the arbitrators will let them.

When push comes to shove, it will be the arbitrators that make the final list regardless of the positions by whomever or the arguments put forth by APA.

eaglefly

As you should know, binding arbitration is a wildcard. The West will likely indeed have some voice (if only to APA), but even if the Nic is included for the arbitrators consideration, that doesn't mean THEY will use it. I don't think APA is required to accept it as that would be taking a specific position on its validity and in fact, deciding it to some degree. Instead, it will be they that punts thus placing any backlash from the West on the NMB should it not be used.

Tough to sue the NMB for DFR and the best path forward for APA in avoiding it from either East or West is to toss the hot potato to them. I don't think either side will ever win this conflict, but simply end accepting a detente decided by those who are insulated from any consequences.

cactiboss

what does the apa have to to with what the west presents? If the court documents are to be believed, the apa plans to set up a "neutral" process where east/west/aa each present their case to a neutral, the very thing the east so vehemently opposes.

SewerPipeDvr

Hence the phrase " APA will try to shaft USAir pilots". Good attorneys will find a way, it just takes money (just like East did to West). I said a while ago the APA might chose the USAir MC reps but the arbitrators will control things. I really think APA just wants a unified work group that the company cannot control. They just don't want the East/West mess in the future. I think they will be careful to ensure they don't end up with Version 2.0. If they are smart that is.

flybywire44

MCB allows USAPA to arbitrate any portion of SLI after 20 days of disagreement.

USAPA did agree to a timeline, but they are well within their right to have the protocol agreement arbitrated as 20 days have past since the agreement appeared.

Saabs

It's Us Airways Son (in my best Whiskey Driver voice). Us Air has been gone for a long time .

East and west suck!