Originally Posted by cactiboss

That's true but it doesn't mean they don't know what you have done.

Originally Posted by DCA A321 FO

#1. Define "you"

#2. Really, the majority are like "whatever"

#3. You actually think others in the industry care about the west, apa will save u.

Originally Posted by DCA A321 FO

Newsflash, the majority of the people in the industry don't give a rats ass about our squabble and don't pay attention.

Originally Posted by Starcheck102

That's true, but they should. Your squabble has cost everyone who flies for a living, not just those at LCC.

Originally Posted by flybywire44

You are basing this off of what legal history?

APA argues that it will be the post-merger certified collective bargaining representative of the merged carrier, but it will not displace the authority of USAPA's Merger Committee as pre-merger bargaining representative.

Why?

Well, MCB guarantees USAPA the right to Allegheny-Mohawk labor protective provisions sections 3 and 13. This allows USAPA to submit any dispute to arbitration 20 days after the dispute arises regardless or any pre-agreement such as an MOU. This will not change post Single Transportation System.

TWA actually had the exact language of Allegheny-Mohawk LPP sections 3 & 13 incorporated into their CBA, but APA forced TWA to waive these provisions (under threat of liquidation) in exchange for APA's "reasonable best efforts" to represent TWA pilots in SLI.

Going forward, MCB protections cannot be waived in this merger voluntarily by APA and/or USAPA.

So boss of Cacti, know that MCB specifically addresses APA's last strategy for SLI. APA is without originality in attempting this again. We can't blame APA for trying. After all, APA's lawyers need billable hours just like AOL lawyers... Right?

So, USAPA has already submitted the merger protocol agreement to arbitration through the MCB guaranteed process of Allegheny-Mohawk. The Civil Aeronautics Board AM LLP sections 3 and 13 via MCB give pre-merger unions the right to pursue fair and equitable
seniority integration on behalf of their pre-merger pilots throughout the SLI process.

This being the case, I am shocked that West pilots acted to recall GH and SB only to recall the BPR, and give GH/SB the keys to the USAPA merger committee. Is there any logic here?!?! DFRs don't reorder seniority lists after they're determined.

Get you heads out of the sand, and don't shoot the messenger!

Originally Posted by GrapeNuts

Page 41 of Siegel's response answers your incorrect assumption regarding McCaskill-Bond:

48. The MOU Seniority-Integration Process is far more detailed, and contains many
more safeguards and protections for both the employees and the carriers than are contained in Allegheny-Mohawk Sections 3 and 13 (quoted in full at Paragraphs 24-25, supra). As a result, the MOU “allow[s] for the protections afforded by sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-Mohawk provisions” within the meaning of 49 U.S.C § 42112, note § 117(a)(2).
49. Because the MOU satisfies the requirements of 49 U.S.C § 42112, note § 117(a)(2), the general requirement under McCaskill-Bond to integrate employee seniority lists according to Sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs is inapplicable to the
US Airways/American pilot seniority integration. "

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Looney tunes.

USAPA refuses to allow West pilots to include the Nic for consideration in any SLI talks and so the West reps on the US Airways merger committee (currently USAPA) bailed, did they not ?

This is obvious, but I never said that they didn't. However, the MTA effective date seems to be the underlying reason why Nicolau is not controlling going forward.

Then, when this same committee minus the West reps they drove off thinks APA is driving THEM off, they file suit to nullify the very agreement they negotiated and agreed to, essentially holding everyone hostage in the hope they can rewrite the process to maintain their relevance.

I assume you are talking about the West Merger Committee members who voluntarily resigned? If so, than you should know that no one drove off these pilots. The West Merger Committee members resigned. Additionally, pilots based in PHX unilaterally voted to end their local USAPA PHX representation by their own volition post-STS.

It would seem that pilots based in PHX want less representation going forward from USAPA, and it is their right to pursue this end.

Where does this sound familiar ?

Yes, your opinions are familiar to me.

Originally Posted by flybywire44

This actually goes to further my points. The MOU in some aspects actually contains less safeguards than McCaskill Bond. For instance, there is no provision in it for arbitration prior to JCBA. This does not safeguard USAPA during the merger protocol agreement. If the MOU was followed explicitly without a merger protocol agreement than it becomes obvious that the MOU exposes it's own timeline to a substantial delay. USAPA is doing more than any party to retire the timeline by utilizing MCB to settle the merger protocol agreement.

I've posted on this further here:
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/am...ml#post1610181

Originally Posted by flybywire44

This actually goes to further my points. The MOU in some aspects actually contains less safeguards than McCaskill Bond. For instance, there is no provision in it for arbitration prior to JCBA. This does not safeguard USAPA during the merger protocol agreement. If the MOU was followed explicitly without a merger protocol agreement than it becomes obvious that the MOU exposes it's own timeline to a substantial delay. USAPA is doing more than any party to retire the timeline by utilizing MCB to settle the merger protocol agreement.

I've posted on this further here:
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/am...ml#post1610181