|
Originally Posted by wiggy
(Post 1357636)
Been following this little saga for awhile, and have some very general impressions as an outsider.
You said this: "best keep your expectations reasonable...expect to have roughly the same career path you would have without the merger.." You do realize that the Nicolau award did not do this and that was the main issue for east pilots, right? Have you read the East ALPA MEC report to the BOD? |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1357523)
Sharp as a tack. It only took 12 pages to figure it out this time.
|
Usapa president update
Here you go fellas, usapa speaks. You want to know why east pilots are the worse informed in the country,? Read this and see if it has anything resemblance to what the west said
On July 26, 2010, US Airways filed a lawsuit in federal court in Arizona before Judge Silver seeking a declaratory judgment. The action was to determine whether USAPA is required to implement the Nicolau Award or is free to pursue a different seniority proposal. A class of west pilots argued that USAPA was required to implement the Nicolau Award. USAPA argued that it was not required to implement the Nic. Two years later on October 11, 2012, Judge Silver dismissed counts I and III of US Airways’ claim and entered a judgment in favor of the US Airline Pilots Association on Count II of the complaint. Her judgment stated that the US Airline Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose. US Airways, supported by the West Pilot Class, then asked Judge Silver to reconsider her decision. That was denied, and her judgment was reaffirmed in favor of USAPA. On December 31, 2012, US Airways appealed the decision of Judge Silver to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Yesterday USAPA’s lawyers asked the Ninth Circuit to expedite the appeal filed by US Airways in order to have it decided prior to a merger with APA. We want there to be no uncertainty about whether USAPA can pursue a different seniority proposal pursuant to a merger. USAPA legal counsel is confident that a prompt resolution of this case will result in the Circuit Court again upholding the USAPA position. The West Pilots have indicated that they will oppose a prompt resolution of the US Airways appeal. USAPA’s motion to expedite and supporting papers are posted in the USAPA Legal Library. During the past several days, the lawyer for the West Pilot Class has sent letters to USAPA, APA and US Airways suggesting that the West Pilots would file a lawsuit to stop the merger unless US Airways implements the Nicolau Award. These letters were fully anticipated by our legal team. USAPA’s position as advised by our legal counsel is that there is no legitimate legal basis for any action to stop the merger. USAPA is fully prepared to defend whatever legal action might be filed that would jeopardize the merger. Our union, our lawyers and our merger counsel have been advised that USAPA will begin the seniority integration process with APA by pursuing what Article I, Section 8 D of our Constitution requires, “To maintain uniform principles of seniority based on date of hire and the perpetuation thereof, with reasonable conditions and restrictions to preserve each pilot’s un-merged career expectations.” This merger provides substantial and life changing benefits to all USAPA pilots, including those based in Phoenix. USAPA will aggressively oppose any efforts to slow down or stop the merger process and will be equally vigilant in adhering to our constitutionally mandated principles that reject the Nicolau Award in its entirety. Regards, |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1357663)
Here you go fellas, usapa speaks. You want to know why east pilots are the worse informed in the country,? Read this and see if it has anything resemblance to what the west said
more evidence, these guys never learn What do you think about the request to expedite the appeal? Good for all of us, right? You didn't highlight the line about the west pilots being opposed to that. Is it true? |
oops, wrong place.............
|
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357675)
Is it just your highlighted sections you disagree with? Did your attorney's letter to the company threatened to get a TRO if you didn't get you way? Any chance that could hurt the merger?
What do you think about the request to expedite the appeal? Good for all of us, right? You didn't highlight the line about the west pilots being opposed to that. Is it true? P.S. We know why Hummel wrote it, DFw.... |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1357681)
Tro to stop anything but Nic, not the merger. Go read the letters.
We have no issue with it, the appeal is for the company's suit (DJ) not ours. I highlighted the areas to show everyone what nut jobs you guys are and how wrong the 9th got it. Btw our lawyers are exstatic with this update. P.S. We know why Hummel wrote it, DFw.... It funny how the people that don't agree with you are nuts. Pilots or judges. |
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357684)
I did go back and read it. It just says that you will file in the courts and ask for a TRO if you do not get your way. It's not specific. Not smart. Maybe you should go read it.
It funny how the people that don't agree with you are nuts. Pilots or judges. |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1357690)
Come on, even you must realize that update is reckless. But hey maybe it will call off the phl boys that are trying to recall him? Can't wait for music and Diorio to take over, that should about end usapa's involvement in this deal.
|
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357691)
Show me in those letter where the TRO would just be on the SLI. Remember, they said they would do whatever it took...........
|
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1357705)
Take the blinders off dude. Btw you asked earlier if the west attorney agreed with the company attorney? I just found out that yes he does, apparently our attorneys get along and work together (us/aol)well, usapa? Not so much.
The company lawyers might not be so cozy with you after this week. |
Did you attorney write "With that said, the West pilots must do whatever is needed to defend the Nicolau Award." or not? Sounds like a very wide ranging threat to me. Especially when congress and the feds are looking into this. Seems a little disingenuous after recommending that his clients vote for the MOU and they did by 97%.
|
Originally Posted by R57 relay;
The company lawyers might not be so cozy with you after this week. |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1357730)
Yeah you are probably right:rolleyes: the company lawyers sure were shocked and surprised. So who is replacing Hummel and symanski?
|
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357734)
No answers huh? Okay, I'll let you off the hook until you hear from your handlers.
|
As a 3rd lister I am painfully aware of both sides of this issue. I understand the textbook definition of binding arbitration, but I also don't see the logic in a never ending litigation over an 8 year old seniority list, that never was implemented.
Now with the M-B legislation in place, would it make more sense just to take all 3 lists as they stand today through the process? The M-B process is not going to allow a strictly DOH combination and must factor relative seniority for career expectations. Granted the West guys would probably not enjoy the same advantages of the Nic, but they would not suffer DOH either. Again, I don't have a dog in the fight but I do have a front seat at the show. Right now we are looking at an unstoppable force pushing an immovable object. |
That wouldn't work, would be nice but it wouldn't work. From what I can tell, the west idea is NIC or absolutely nothing, though if you sample random easties, it's usually ANYTHING but the NIC.
I will hand it to the westies and AOL, for a small group, they got a great propaganda machine. The have all the forums covered, they got the videos makers etc etc etc...... Ask a Westie if he would be willing to come off the stance of ONLY NIC, for labor peace so we could move on? I already know the answer. |
I agree. I have talked with West guys and its the Nic or nothing. No compromise. With that line of thinking, it'll either be brilliant triumph or a blundering failure. Not much room in the middle.
|
I encourage the westies to push their agenda..Please continue your unabated saber rattling!! It will only expedite your own demise..Just ask the AirTran guys how their effort worked out. It is now blatantly and i reputably obvious that the West Class pilots are attempting to garner advantages on the new AA/USA SLI process by accepting nothing else but their beloved Nic. It is no longer a matter of securing a fair integration for them..It is WINNER TAKES ALL!! They are willing to advance their agenda at the expense of ALL USA and most AA pilots. They are not content with pay-raises or the career advancement potential that this merger will provide. It is in their view, that their pathetic little airline, the former AW, has saved USA and now AA. And for this, they will not rest until their 9 year LOS pilots upgrade to a group 2 AC or better, regardless of who, or how many pilots they damage along the way. This is a wake up call to ALL pilots presently involved in this merger. If fairness is truly their intent, then why attempt to hold this merger hostage at the detriment of the entire pilot group?
|
Originally Posted by pullforexit
(Post 1357832)
I agree. I have talked with West guys and its the Nic or nothing. No compromise. With that line of thinking, it'll either be brilliant triumph or a blundering failure. Not much room in the middle.
|
I am a complete outsider on this as well. I will not argue what is fair or who is winning the legal maneuvering.
But in the end I don't think you can wiggle out of binding arbitration. I think the Nic list will eventually be it. The when part is still a big unknown. |
Originally Posted by Puros
(Post 1357864)
Well, I can't really blame the west either. The arbitration is a compromise between two opposing views on seniority- why would the west compromise any more? It would be compromising on the compromise.
To accept that the T/A between US and AW left a loophole that makes the Nic unachievable for years and years? That is a point they rarely talk about or one that most other pilots even know about. To move on? To not threaten the merger? Last year a west pilot cleaned up the Nicolau award to see what it would look like today. The founder of AOL would jump from around 88% on the AWA standalone list to 76% on the Nicolau award. A position that would give him much greater opportunities than he has now. One of the most junior west captain would only go from 49% west to 45% on the Nic. Senior captains would lose relative position and have PHX left wide open to more senior captains from the east. Every single pilot on the west seniority list could be an E190 captain under the Nic. The top 85% or so could be a 737 or greater captain, A330 for 76I F/O. Those are the reasons they hold on so tight. I get it. I understand they did nothing wrong and just want what the process gave them. But the process has proven to be flawed and we have to deal with that. I wonder what we could have achieved if we had just done what the 9th circuit of appeals told us to do years ago. NEGOTIATE. Meanwhile, I've not heard a peep about the really big SLI. |
Originally Posted by wiggy
(Post 1357636)
...[redacted]...
Another general point...the further an sli gets from maintaining status and category...ie "effective maintenance of premerger relative seniority, vis a vis equipment held"... The more of a mess an integration becomes. DOH is the classic demographic that pilots latch on to if it gives a distinct advantage for that group...it is to be expected and is human nature. But the principle of "first hired" becomes a much less "lofty" or "fair" principle when it just so happens to..."coincidently" result in a windfall. DOH, unlike the classic "get out of jail free" card, -is not an "instant widebody left seat" card under any scenario...even in the far-fetched scenario of an awarded DOH list, there would be long and sturdy career-duration fences keeping you from enjoying that anticipated windfall....best keep your expectations reasonable...expect to have roughly the same career path you would have without the merger...slanted in favor of maintaining current equities vice future (however mathematically certain..ie "retirements") equities. ...[redacted]...
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1357436)
And that's the leap you just can't make IMO. It will not be a judge that's finds a DFR claim, it will be a jury. You will not be able to prove to a majority of jurors (to a preponderance of the evidence) that you've been harmed by two separate lists brought to this arbitration. You will be forced to define "harm" as not getting to keep the windfall that never happened. That will make you appear that you are using a court to gain advantage...as opposed to achieving fairness. If I were your attorney, I would urge you to drop this. IMO, you can't win. And even if you did, USAPA would file bankruptcy and discharge any monetary judgment. I also don't believe your lawsuit will produce any injunction that slows down the SLI arbitration.
It's far better to not spend the money on a suit that you'll recover nothing from, even if you win. Shoot for a fast fair combining of operations and the pay increases that will follow. Carl It does seem alarmingly early for Leonidas saber rattling, but AOL may sense that if they don't accomplish something early via intimidation or injunction than they never will. This merger is bigger than Nic and DOH. Take a page from Delta—windfalls should be avoided. |
I'm interested to see if Parker can earn his big promotion. He didn't get involved before because he wanted to keep the East working under a bankruptcy contract. That is how he rolls- with a big ol' grin on his face while he's screwing you. This time, I am hoping that there is an advantage for Parker to actually manage the situation.
|
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357889)
To accept that the T/A between US and AW left a loophole that makes the Nic unachievable for years and years? That is a point they rarely talk about or one that most other pilots even know about. To move on? To not threaten the merger?
Last year a west pilot cleaned up the Nicolau award to see what it would look like today. The founder of AOL would jump from around 88% on the AWA standalone list to 76% on the Nicolau award. A position that would give him much greater opportunities than he has now. One of the most junior west captain would only go from 49% west to 45% on the Nic. Senior captains would lose relative position and have PHX left wide open to more senior captains from the east. Every single pilot on the west seniority list could be an E190 captain under the Nic. The top 85% or so could be a 737 or greater captain, A330 for 76I F/O. Those are the reasons they hold on so tight. . |
Originally Posted by pullforexit
(Post 1357793)
As a 3rd lister I am painfully aware of both sides of this issue. I understand the textbook definition of binding arbitration, but I also don't see the logic in a never ending litigation over an 8 year old seniority list, that never was implemented.
Now with the M-B legislation in place, would it make more sense just to take all 3 lists as they stand today through the process? The M-B process is not going to allow a strictly DOH combination and must factor relative seniority for career expectations. Granted the West guys would probably not enjoy the same advantages of the Nic, but they would not suffer DOH either. Again, I don't have a dog in the fight but I do have a front seat at the show. Right now we are looking at an unstoppable force pushing an immovable object. |
Last year a west pilot cleaned up the Nicolau award to see what it would look like today
Where is it? |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1358085)
should a west furlough be junior to you? Why/why not?
|
Originally Posted by CanoePilot
(Post 1358089)
Furloughs should always go to the bottom. A furlough doesn't bring a job to the table.
|
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357889)
I get it. I understand they did nothing wrong and just want what the process gave them. But the process has proven to be flawed and we have to deal with that. I wonder what we could have achieved if we had just done what the 9th circuit of appeals told us to do years ago. NEGOTIATE. Meanwhile, I've not heard a peep about the really big SLI. |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1358077)
And usapa has taken advantage of the loophole to prevent the implementation of the Nic. and harm the west. The Nic. is not unachievable, it needs a single contract according to the 9th.
When the Nicolau award came out I was a 757 captain, we had no furloughs or downgrades. The fact the cleaned up list puts me back on a 757 captain that I lost is proof of your robbery. Today we have almost 200 downgrades over 100 furloughs and lost 26 airplanes. So now you want to compare what happen post Nicolau and have the west walk into sli at a disadvantage, a disadvantage that you caused by exploiting a loophole and providing the company much cheaper labor. All the reductions out west happened 3 years after we merged and two years after a single certificate and with you owing us 3 757 and 1/3 of the 190 seats. By the way, OUR current MOU dropped the min block hr./min. fleet # prots. What do you think is coming down the pipe for the west?? Your latest scheme is nothing more than a desperate attempt at securing a "first class" seat on the SS AA/USA merger. Your ship is sinking fast, and this latest "All In" by the west might just accelerate your travels to the bottom!! By the way, if you want the 190 seats, get ready cause there coming to you in mass!! |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1358097)
A pilot that doesn't bring a job should go to the bottom, but what about guys that have bypassed and allowed junior guys to return?
|
Originally Posted by LittleBoyBlew
(Post 1358123)
Ok Victim, let me get this straight. In 2008 oil hit a record high of $145/brl. Your precious LAS base, along with other PHX routes, became instant money losers. Along with the retirement of the 737 and resulting Airbus consolidation= a surplus of west pilots. If not for the Min. block hr/min. fleet provisions of OUR TA, your pilot group would have been decimated!! This is why the west operates 25% of east flights. To keep you guys above the minimums. So please tells us why the east should subsidize the downturn and subsequent downsizing of the west operation???
By the way, OUR current MOU dropped the min block hr./min. fleet # prots. What do you think is coming down the pipe for the west?? Your latest scheme is nothing more than a desperate attempt at securing a "first class" seat on the SS AA/USA merger. Your ship is sinking fast, and this latest "All In" by the west might just accelerate your travels to the bottom!! By the way, if you want the 190 seats, get ready cause there coming to you in mass!! |
Originally Posted by pullforexit
(Post 1358126)
While noble, recall rights should not be used a political weapon. If you bypass recall, you are bypassing your own seniority rights as well.
|
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1358129)
Got it, says everything I need to know about you.
Talk this out with me. We ended up with two operations because the east and west couldn't come together on a seniority list. The company took advantage of the financial situation and put all growth on the east side. West pilots bypassed recall because they didn't want to work with the east and wanted to poke the company in the eye. The company then hired 3rd list pilots to fill jobs that West pilots refused to take. You asked if I should ever be placed ahead of furloughed west pilots on a seniority list. Obviously in a perfect world this shouldn't even be a question. The furloughs would all be back before any new hires came about. So no I don't think I should ever (nor do I think I ever will) be placed in a higher seniority position than a pilot who was hired before me. But if you voluntarily bypass recall the company has to hire a pilot to fill the position you refuse to take. Should the furloughee then get their seniority back after they decide their personal sit out is over? I completely understand bypassing recall if you have a better gig going, don't want to commute, married a hot millionaire wife, or whatever else. But if you're just trying to prove a point and then get upset about you seniority when you come back, I have less sympathy. |
Originally Posted by R57 relay
(Post 1357889)
To accept that the T/A between US and AW left a loophole that makes the Nic unachievable for years and years? That is a point they rarely talk about or one that most other pilots even know about. To move on? To not threaten the merger?
Last year a west pilot cleaned up the Nicolau award to see what it would look like today. The founder of AOL would jump from around 88% on the AWA standalone list to 76% on the Nicolau award. A position that would give him much greater opportunities than he has now. One of the most junior west captain would only go from 49% west to 45% on the Nic. Senior captains would lose relative position and have PHX left wide open to more senior captains from the east. Every single pilot on the west seniority list could be an E190 captain under the Nic. The top 85% or so could be a 737 or greater captain, A330 for 76I F/O. Those are the reasons they hold on so tight. I get it. I understand they did nothing wrong and just want what the process gave them. But the process has proven to be flawed and we have to deal with that. I wonder what we could have achieved if we had just done what the 9th circuit of appeals told us to do years ago. NEGOTIATE. Meanwhile, I've not heard a peep about the really big SLI. Bean |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1358103)
I wonder what the 3 arbitrators in the us/aa arbitration will think of what the east had done? Of hummels recent letter? Of the fact usapa's merger committee can only negotiate for DOH?
Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1358303)
None of that sort of nonsense will ever get to the eyes of the arbitrators. And even if someone, somehow slipped it in to them, they'd toss it as nothing more than " he said, she said" in a divorce proceeding. None of that stuff matters. The arbitration panel will only care about the lists that are current, the two sides' proposed new list, past precedent, and their own judgment. Everything else is just a side show that bores the hell out of the arbitrators.
Carl |
Originally Posted by pullforexit
(Post 1358149)
Oh come on Cacti, we're trying to have a conversation here. Your statement above doesn't really garner a good discussion.
Talk this out with me. We ended up with two operations because the east and west couldn't come together on a seniority list. The company took advantage of the financial situation and put all growth on the east side. West pilots bypassed recall because they didn't want to work with the east and wanted to poke the company in the eye. The company then hired 3rd list pilots to fill jobs that West pilots refused to take. You asked if I should ever be placed ahead of furloughed west pilots on a seniority list. Obviously in a perfect world this shouldn't even be a question. The furloughs would all be back before any new hires came about. So no I don't think I should ever (nor do I think I ever will) be placed in a higher seniority position than a pilot who was hired before me. But if you voluntarily bypass recall the company has to hire a pilot to fill the position you refuse to take. Should the furloughee then get their seniority back after they decide their personal sit out is over? I completely understand bypassing recall if you have a better gig going, don't want to commute, married a hot millionaire wife, or whatever else. But if you're just trying to prove a point and then get upset about you seniority when you come back, I have less sympathy. From judge Silver: The primary focus of the parties’ summary judgment filings is whether the Transition 5 Agreement is “binding” on USAPA. According to USAPA, it is “not ‘contractually’ bound 6 by any of ALPA’s agreements,” including the Transition Agreement. (Doc. 160 at 10). But 7 the West Pilots, as well as US Airways, cite a variety of authority supporting the position that 8 the “decertification of ALPA and the certification of USAPA did not change the binding 9 nature of the Transition Agreement.” (Doc. 164 at 7). The West Pilots and US Airways are 10 correct. |
Btw, the DJ appeal has nothing to do with the letters the west sent, it's a different issue.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:00 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands