Search

Notices

Judge Silver rules

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-12-2014 | 01:17 PM
  #161  
LittleBoyBlew's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
From: Bigg Bird!!
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
What did the courts speak about? Do you even understand what was/wasn't ruled on? All she ruled was that the MOU itself wasn't a dfr because it was "seniority neutral". That leaves the west completely able to sue whomever the bargaining agent is and the company if the nic. is not used as the list in MB.
You are obsessed and blinded by your focus on the nic and its windfall award. Do you not understand that ALL previous TAs, CBAs, etc are NOW. null and VOID!! My God man get a grip of reality. The nic is done!! Your vision of captaining a WB across the N Atl. will have to wait. Seniority has a purpose in all things aviation. Any shortcuts to the top are windfalls, wether wrongfully granted or otherwise. Enjoy misery. I for one am rejoicing at the mere aspect of a promising future.
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 01:34 PM
  #162  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
Isn't the company the one that wanted the west at the table? Isn't the company the one that said they are responsible for a "fair" integration? The east will never fairly represent the west and according to the judge avoided a dfr by the "slimmest" of margins. You think that the company won't take that language seriously?
Yes and yes to the first two questions. However, if you think that they did this out of some sort or morality or loyalty to you (the royal you) you (the single you) are delusional. I suspect that you are not that naive - that you know why the company did it and now that the judge has ruled( ''avoided'' a dfr being the operative word) there is no reason for the company to revisit it. Thus the answer to your final question is a resounding, "Yes, yes I do." (see last post by Carl Spackler)
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 02:01 PM
  #163  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by justjack
Yes and yes to the first two questions. However, if you think that they did this out of some sort or morality or loyalty to you (the royal you) you (the single you) are delusional. I suspect that you are not that naive - that you know why the company did it and now that the judge has ruled( ''avoided'' a dfr being the operative word) there is no reason for the company to revisit it. Thus the answer to your final question is a resounding, "Yes, yes I do." (see last post by Carl Spackler)
I firmly believe the company was just covering it's behind. I also firmly believe Silver's ruling puts the ball in theirs and apa's court, I expect the company to continue to try to cover it's behind by trying to find a way to include the west and avoid liability going forward.
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 02:41 PM
  #164  
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
Default

Hey cacti,

The SD-DEN game is a little slow, so I went backed and looked at the AOL update page. I'm losing track of claims. Didn't you at one time claim that the MOU didn't do away with the Nic? Back on 2/20/2013 you said this:

"On the "effective date" the Mou itself says we are all on the same contract, further the mou says that contract is retroactive to feb. 8th. Usapa and company says that a agreement that changes pay/vacation/ work rules is not a contract, we say it is and that is what judges are for. We also believe that the act of specifically excluding the Nic\. from the mou is collusion with usapa and another avenue to sue the merged company and the apa if the nic. is not used."

When did you change that? When the company was dismissed from the case?

Have you thought of suing Harper and Ferguson?
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 02:44 PM
  #165  
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
Default

Another nugget:

Originally Posted by R57 relay View Post
"Again, wouldn't that have been a question to answer before recommending to your clients to vote for it? Did they only learn of this after the vote less than two weeks ago? Remember, you guys voted for it and as a block would have had a really good chance of defeating it."

Cacti responded:
"yeah that's it, we are completely surprised by the language. Oh wait, leonidas principals wrote it with input from leonidas attorneys"

You admit AOL wrote it. Then you sued over it. Integrity in action!:-0
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 03:29 PM
  #166  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by R57 relay
. Integrity in action!:-0
Have you read Silvers ruling? She sure thinks the east and their lawyer are full of integrity.
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 03:34 PM
  #167  
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
Have you read Silvers ruling? She sure thinks the east and their lawyer are full of integrity.
Avoiding the questions?

What was the first premiss of AOL? I believe it was that the MOU completed the TA and made the Nic effective, wasn't it?
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 03:43 PM
  #168  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
Have you read Silvers ruling? She sure thinks the east and their lawyer are full of integrity.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
))
Don Addington, et al, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )
)
US Airline Pilots Association, et al, )
)
Defendants, )


JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
CV 13-0471-PHX-ROS

Decision by Court. This action came for consideration before theCourt. The issues have been considered and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court's Order of
January 10, 2014, judgment is hereby entered as follows: judgment in favor of
Defendant US Airline Pilots Association on Count I and Count IV, judgment in favor
of US Airways, Inc. on Count II, and a judgment of dismissal without prejudice on
Count III. This action are hereby terminated.

.
January 10, 2014

BRIAN D. KARTH
Clerk of Court
.
Ruth E. Williams
Deputy Clerk
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 03:50 PM
  #169  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
I firmly believe the company was just covering it's behind. I also firmly believe Silver's ruling puts the ball in theirs and apa's court, I expect the company to continue to try to cover it's behind by trying to find a way to include the west and avoid liability going forward.
I agree except I don't think that the company cares about the East or the West. They were only interested in their own liability- which I think is where we agree. Where we differ is on our opinion on what Silver's ruling means. I am no attorney and I can only read the ruling and form an opinion on what it means. That said, I think the company is off the hook and given the fact that they could not care less about any other aspect of the dispute, I suspect that the company has all it needs now. In my ever so humble opinion, this ruling closed the door on the Nic. But I don't rule out Zombie Nic. I truly wish that there was a way to make you(the royal you) happy or at least content - short of the Nic. Again, in my opinion the Nic is dead and what is left standing are two pilot groups, shattered by unrestrained deregulation, bankruptcy laws and corporate plunderers. The debate about who we are, where we came from and what we deserve has always been framed in the wrong way. It has been framed in a way that puts pilot against pilot rather than pilot against management. I stand here today with my hand out- I don't want you to feel like your fellow pilots screwed you. I want a fair and just agreement. If your only reply to me is ''binding is binding- the Nic is the only way" then I suppose there is nothing left to say.
Reply
Old 01-12-2014 | 04:31 PM
  #170  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by justjack
I agree except I don't think that the company cares about the East or the West. They were only interested in their own liability- which I think is where we agree. Where we differ is on our opinion on what Silver's ruling means. I am no attorney and I can only read the ruling and form an opinion on what it means. That said, I think the company is off the hook and given the fact that they could not care less about any other aspect of the dispute, I suspect that the company has all it needs now. In my ever so humble opinion, this ruling closed the door on the Nic. But I don't rule out Zombie Nic. I truly wish that there was a way to make you(the royal you) happy or at least content - short of the Nic. Again, in my opinion the Nic is dead and what is left standing are two pilot groups, shattered by unrestrained deregulation, bankruptcy laws and corporate plunderers. The debate about who we are, where we came from and what we deserve has always been framed in the wrong way. It has been framed in a way that puts pilot against pilot rather than pilot against management. I stand here today with my hand out- I don't want you to feel like your fellow pilots screwed you. I want a fair and just agreement. If your only reply to me is ''binding is binding- the Nic is the only way" then I suppose there is nothing left to say.
Well I have been wrong on every legal question so far. Anything less than the Nic is a travesty of justice. We will do all we can to hold the east accountable, see you in court

Last edited by cactiboss; 01-12-2014 at 04:43 PM.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cactiboss
American
3154
06-25-2014 10:54 AM
cactiboss
Major
198
11-03-2012 01:52 PM
alarkyokie
Hangar Talk
5
09-22-2008 08:30 AM
RockBottom
Major
3
08-02-2005 02:02 PM
HSLD
Major
0
02-19-2005 09:43 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices