Originally Posted by eaglefly

Oh Fred, you silly alpha males still don't get it. The JCBA (work rules, etc.) is SUBJECT to change vs. the present MTA. We should EXPECT changes in that. That's not the same thing as believing APA can control what your reps argue in SLI negotiations or in the failure of that, what they present to the arbitrators. It's also not the same thing as what the ARBITRATORS decide regarding SLI (not APA).



I don't recall making a "big deal" about that. It is simply one of the required benchmarks on the way to USAPA's dissolution. USAPA didn't agree to waive its rights, they agreed to waive their EXISTENCE. The MOU wasn't overseen by Silver and was not only agreed to by USAPA, its provisions were NEGOTIATED by them. It's the MOU that defines the process, timeline and order.



Yep. USAPA is disputing the terms they negotiated and agreed to with Hummel's signature. That about boils it down into its pure form.



Hogwash. It's no wonder some of you guys get so worked up about what I say. You don't understand a thing I say at all and seem to instead insert your own error and bias in interpreting it. I never said I would "support" anything from APA......they may become my worst enemy for Christ's sake ! What I have essentially stated is that there is no "interpretation" necessary regarding USAPA's existence because the MOU clearly spells it out and when. USAPA negotiated that and agreed to it. I've stated since it is clear, there should be no dispute about it and normally there wouldn't be, but most of those on planet Earth know what USAPA does and usually it's AFTER they either dislike a result or AFTER they get a benefit. I wouldn't support USAPA on the basis they weren't my present union, I'd refuse to support them on the basis I believe they are hopelessly corrupt. It's a foundational position, not a representational one.

I don't care WHO the technical "union" is, as long as on this issue, all relevant sides get to fairly present their interests before neutral arbitrators and that includes the East (as well as those other guys flying on your seniority list who apparently aren't East pilots ). As long as that occurs, it doesn't matter who the union is, because it will be neutral arbitrators that decide the merits of each position and argument and who will weigh what is argued or asserted before them.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Eagle ?

What does anything have to do with that ?

Jesus. Look, feel free to discuss that which you want. I'm not obsessed enough to take it personally or consider it "inflammatory" simply because I may disagree with it. I promise not to call you any derogatory names or makes offensive references to your family. That's something that seems to be part of a USAPA repertoire, not mine. I think if you're going to go around in life considering anything you disagree with as inflammatory, you're setting yourself up for a lot of angst, especially when it comes to this forum. Discuss or criticize APA and/or the present or former AA flow-thru's all you want. Well, you've already taken that liberty with APA anyway, but knock yourself out. I promise not to come unglued.

....and for the record, I've never begged anyone to do anything here. You don't want to believe I was a former Eagle pilot ? Hey, that's cool. I really couldn't care less. That seems to be another one of your obsessions and why you care either way, I have no idea. If it wasn't a personal issue for you, you'd never bring it up, but have at least several times over the last year and here it is again.

Originally Posted by R57 relay

Got to make this quick.

-There is no dispute that USAPA will no longer be the CBA. None. They didn't agree to the end of their existence, just their role a CBA in the future. The dispute is over the interpretation that says USAPA has no role in the SLI after SCS. That is illogical and didn't come up until Judge Silver's crazy comments. You keep twisting this.
-Of course CBA provisions can be changed, my point was that the APA changed the provisions of the MOU AFTER we voted on it. With no input from USAPA. The same thing you are accusing USAPA of trying to do. I voted for a MOU that had a 1/3.25 rig. They APA dropped that for me.
-You show me in the MOU where it says that USAPA will have no role in the SLI. Show me other MB SLIs where the former CBA had no role. You're right, there should be no interpretation, but that is what the APA decided to run with.
-You said that if there was a chance that USAPA could be elected as the CBA you would not support them having total control over the process. I get it, I agree, that's why it makes no sense for the APA to have that role. "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other."
-A lot of people have problems with what you say. So, what is the common denominator with that? YOU.

Now if you will excuse me, I've wasted :15 minutes of beach time on this.

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle

Thank you for posting smaller post of more reasonable length.

Originally Posted by R57 relay

Got to make this quick.

-There is no dispute that USAPA will no longer be the CBA. None. They didn't agree to the end of their existence, just their role a CBA in the future. The dispute is over the interpretation that says USAPA has no role in the SLI after SCS. That is illogical and didn't come up until Judge Silver's crazy comments. You keep twisting this.
-Of course CBA provisions can be changed, my point was that the APA changed the provisions of the MOU AFTER we voted on it. With no input from USAPA. The same thing you are accusing USAPA of trying to do. I voted for a MOU that had a 1/3.25 rig. They APA dropped that for me.
-You show me in the MOU where it says that USAPA will have no role in the SLI. Show me other MB SLIs where the former CBA had no role. You're right, there should be no interpretation, but that is what the APA decided to run with.
-You said that if there was a chance that USAPA could be elected as the CBA you would not support them having total control over the process. I get it, I agree, that's why it makes no sense for the APA to have that role. "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other."
-A lot of people have problems with what you say. So, what is the common denominator with that? YOU.

Now if you will excuse me, I've wasted :15 minutes of beach time on this.

Originally Posted by GrapeNuts

So, in your view Captain Hypocrite, the east should retain complete control of their merger committee and the west shouldn't be allowed to have a committee. Got it.
Situational ethics.

Thanks for the post, your hypocrisy is truly a USAPA trademark.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Virtually all of my posts would fill less then one-half page of an average paperback. I had no idea that was too much for you to process. My condolences on coping with that situation as it must be very difficult.

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle

Thank you for another short post. You are on a roll, but you forgot to malign USAPA and you didn't congratulate more third listers for getting captain and wide body bids.

Originally Posted by GrapeNuts

So, in your view Captain Hypocrite, the east should retain complete control of their merger committee and the west shouldn't be allowed to have a committee. Got it.
Situational ethics.

Thanks for the post, your hypocrisy is truly a USAPA trademark.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

I have no knowledge of what your bids are, but I'm happy for those who are getting bids they desire. As for maligning USAPA, I'm sure their next well-worn move of maligning themselves will leave plenty of opportunity to point out the obvious.