Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




Stetson29
02-01-2014, 07:19 AM
The two West members of our Merger Committee have resigned. At a meeting on January 29, 2014, our entire Committee met in Washington in an attempt to resolve our differences on what lists to work with as we proceed with the Seniority List Integration (SLI). As you know, our Committee is tasked with protecting the seniority of all USAPA pilots, East and West. While this Committee has always had differences regarding the equity and fairness of the unmodified Nicolau award, the West members have always told us they would consider other methods of integration once the courts ruled. They gave that assurance at the time they were appointed to the Committee and reaffirmed that commitment after their appointments. Now that the Federal Court in Phoenix, AZ has determined USAPA is not obligated to submit the Nicolau Award's Integrated Seniority List (ISL) as the premerger seniority list for US Airways pilots, the West members have reneged on their prior assurance and refuse to consider alternative methods for achieving an ISL with the American pilots. During the meeting, the East members repeatedly offered to have them review and consider a series of potential SLI methods. However, they stated the unmodified Nicolau award is the only list they would consider. We have, of course, considered the unmodified Nicolau list and our thorough review clearly demonstrates that it doesn’t satisfy the fair and equitable requirements of McCaskill-Bond, nor is it fair for our pilot group as a whole.

The West members offered as a solution, that they be assigned to a West-only committee to advocate for the unmodified Nicolau award. The East members do not have the ability to approve or disapprove that request, but we told them we would present that request to the BPR. The next morning, before we had the chance to present this request to the BPR, they abruptly resigned via email in a letter (click here) that contained numerous inaccuracies.

The East committee members have consistently tried to engage the West committee members as we work toward a fair and equitable list, but we could not persuade them to consider alternative methodologies for seniority integration. During this meeting on the 29th, they made it clear they would only consider the unmodified Nicolau award. That unreasonable stance cannot serve the interests of all US Airways pilots and does not fulfill the duties of our Committee or USAPA’s Duty of Fair Representation to all US Airways pilots. All proposals made by this Committee must be, and will be fair for all pilots; not just West pilots and not just East pilots.We are continuously working toward a fair and equitable list which we will present as our case. At this time, nothing more has been decided beyond our conclusion that the unmodified Nicolau list is not an option. Regrettably, in spite of our effort to salvage their participation, in a letter to the USAPA president, (click here) the committee chairman recommended he accept their resignation due to their unreasonable and inflexible stance.

Meaningful participation of any Merger Committee member requires the ability to be open-minded in order to explore and consider many aspects of how the lists may eventually be merged. If West participation on our Committee is limited to unwavering and unreasonable commitment to the unmodified Nicolau list, it obstructs our desire, goal, and ability to reach a fair and equitable SLI as required by McCaskill -Bond. Particularly after two court decisions holding to the contrary, continued strident pursuit for imposition of the Nicolau list is a disservice to all of our pilots.

It is our desire to have West members on our Committee who are committed to the McCaskill-Bond goals of a fair and equitable SLI for all US Airways and American pilots. If any West pilot feels they can make that commitment to work with us toward that goal, we would welcome them to the Committee. In the meantime, we will continue the work for a fair and equitable SLI for all pilots of the new American Airlines.


Saabs
02-01-2014, 08:27 AM
Great. More USAPA emails filling up my inbox.

kingairip
02-01-2014, 08:29 AM
Uhhh. This. "We are continuously working toward a fair and equitable list which we will present as our case."

I thought the impression of the East guys was that USAPA was going to present 2 lists? Looks like USAPA will present a list. How is that going to work?


Wiskey Driver
02-01-2014, 08:36 AM
Uhhh. This. "We are continuously working toward a fair and equitable list which we will present as our case."

I thought the impression of the East guys was that USAPA was going to present 2 lists? Looks like USAPA is will present a list. How is that going to work?

Completely in THEIR FAVOR and something totally unfair to the west in every regard. Court battle to be continued for years to come.

WD at AWA

kingairip
02-01-2014, 09:02 AM
Completely in THEIR FAVOR and something totally unfair to the west in every regard. Court battle to be continued for years to come.

WD at AWA

Yea...not a good scenario at all.

PurpleTurtle
02-01-2014, 09:36 AM
Uhhh. This. "We are continuously working toward a fair and equitable list which we will present as our case."

I thought the impression of the East guys was that USAPA was going to present 2 lists? Looks like USAPA will present a list. How is that going to work?

I would think USAPA and APA both are obligated to submit a proposed single list encompassing all pilots from both companies, i.e. a final proposed merged list, and accompany it with their rationale or method of achieving the singe proposed list.

The decision up to USAPA and APA is to agree on a combined list, the ugly details about how they come to an agreement really aren't of any importance, if they can agree on a final SLI.

The company has three seniority lists. USAPA and APA must agree on a new single list, or have one arbitrated.

R57 relay
02-01-2014, 09:42 AM
Yea...not a good scenario at all.

We have a contract with a tight timeliness. We have a ruling from Judge Silver. If the company wants to drag it out, oh well, maybe we can go back to court.


If you are east the June bid will be out soon. I think the west is going to have a small one too. Life goes on.

eaglefly
02-01-2014, 07:42 PM
Seems to me it's a strategic move. If they were to agree to participate in negotiating something other then the Nic, it could be used against them in any future legal proceedings as a prima facie admission that they admit the Nic is a dead issue. Maybe they consider the whole thing a slick set-up ?

As I said before, there will be plenty of twists and turns in this creature feature for many months to come.

flybywire44
02-01-2014, 08:23 PM
I would think USAPA and APA both are obligated to submit a proposed single list encompassing all pilots from both companies, i.e. a final proposed merged list, and accompany it with their rationale or method of achieving the singe proposed list.

The decision up to USAPA and APA is to agree on a combined list, the ugly details about how they come to an agreement really aren't of any importance, if they can agree on a final SLI.

The company has three seniority lists. USAPA and APA must agree on a new single list, or have one arbitrated.

The MOU says that the "lists in effect" and it would seem that Us Airways has two lists in effect.

texaspilot76
02-02-2014, 12:47 PM
Is there any particular reason why third listers can't bid for PHX? It's obvious that there is no debate on their seniority in relation to the west since they are post merger hires. It seems to me that when a PHX slot opens that a third lister should be allowed to bid it.

CanoePilot
02-02-2014, 12:53 PM
I hate to sound like i'm taking a side in this because i'm not, but from what i've read it really looks like legally that the west is out of options in getting the nic implemented before the AA/US sli/jcba completion.

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 07:12 AM
I hate to sound like i'm taking a side in this because i'm not, but from what i've read it really looks like legally that the west is out of options in getting the nic implemented before the AA/US sli/jcba completion.

Nothing has been done yet so the option(s) is/are still in play. Once there is something to view or better said compare then we will see. Remember all we have to show is that we were placed in a worse position so that the east could elevate themselves and that others aided in that action and its court room time again. I must hand it to the east as the stall tactic has worked for years to their advantage. Their never producing a list that placed us in harms way has been their saving grace but the pin in that grenade is about to be pulled.

WD at AWA

eaglefly
02-03-2014, 07:33 AM
Nothing has been done yet so the option(s) is/are still in play. Once there is something to view or better said compare then we will see. Remember all we have to show is that we were placed in a worse position so that the east could elevate themselves and that others aided in that action and its court room time again. I must hand it to the east as the stall tactic has worked for years to their advantage. Their never producing a list that placed us in harms way has been their saving grace but the pin in that grenade is about to be pulled.

WD at AWA

The longer this conflict remains a dispute, the more delay in the SLI process with AA pilots. If the East doesn't put the Nic on the table I assume Leo will file a DFR suit which could take years. One question is if USAPA is neutered on schedule by the MOU and APA's single carrier filing, how can Leo sue an entity that no longer exists and is dissolved ? At that point, it would seem they'd have to set their sights on APA demanding it is then they that must accept the Nic. That could still take years.

Definitely interesting to watch this all play out and it could be many years before this SLI ever sees the light of day. It's just one of the many differences that the other SLI's don't have.

R57 relay
02-03-2014, 08:19 AM
Nothing has been done yet so the option(s) is/are still in play. Once there is something to view or better said compare then we will see. Remember all we have to show is that we were placed in a worse position so that the east could elevate themselves and that others aided in that action and its court room time again. I must hand it to the east as the stall tactic has worked for years to their advantage. Their never producing a list that placed us in harms way has been their saving grace but the pin in that grenade is about to be pulled.

WD at AWA


You guys decided to go to court! You decided Nic or nothing. So far, you got nothing. Accept that decision.

You asked over and over where you gave up your rights. I was waiting for you to man up and admit that you couldn't produce the Kirby numbers that were as good as the MOU. You couldn't because you didn't have them and they don't exist, but that will never happen. You aren't man enough to admit that you are wrong. So, according to the Judge you love so much, or at least when you are cherry picking her words, you didn't give up your rights. Even though you guys overwhelmingly voted for the MOU, you couldn't be held responsible. USAPA gave up the Nic. AND she found they weren't guilty of failure of DFR for doing so. She said that they had a, wait for it...........LEGITIMATE UNION PURPOSE for doing so..

We have a contract, an agreement. The MOU abandoned the Nic and has a tight timeline for the SLI. Honor your agreements.

R57 relay
02-03-2014, 08:21 AM
The longer this conflict remains a dispute, the more delay in the SLI process with AA pilots. If the East doesn't put the Nic on the table I assume Leo will file a DFR suit which could take years. One question is if USAPA is neutered on schedule by the MOU and APA's single carrier filing, how can Leo sue an entity that no longer exists and is dissolved ? At that point, it would seem they'd have to set their sights on APA demanding it is then they that must accept the Nic. That could still take years.

Definitely interesting to watch this all play out and it could be many years before this SLI ever sees the light of day. It's just one of the many differences that the other SLI's don't have.

There should be no dispute. We have an agreement. We have a ruling from Judge Silver. It's all up to the company and the APA. If they want to drag it out, they can.

R57 relay
02-03-2014, 08:38 AM
I posted this on the AOL thread in an attempt to keep the east/west bs in on place. Impossible I guess, so if anyone missed it, here ya go. I'm waiting to hear the outrage about the west merger committee members not living up to their agreement.

The two West members of our Merger Committee have resigned. At a meeting on January 29, 2014, our entire Committee met in Washington in an attempt to resolve our differences on what lists to work with as we proceed with the Seniority List Integration (SLI). As you know, our Committee is tasked with protecting the seniority of all USAPA pilots, East and West. While this Committee has always had differences regarding the equity and fairness of the unmodified Nicolau award, the West members have always told us they would consider other methods of integration once the courts ruled. They gave that assurance at the time they were appointed to the Committee and reaffirmed that commitment after their appointments. Now that the Federal Court in Phoenix, AZ has determined USAPA is not obligated to submit the Nicolau Award's Integrated Seniority List (ISL) as the premerger seniority list for US Airways pilots, the West members have reneged on their prior assurance and refuse to consider alternative methods for achieving an ISL with the American pilots. During the meeting, the East members repeatedly offered to have them review and consider a series of potential SLI methods. However, they stated the unmodified Nicolau award is the only list they would consider. We have, of course, considered the unmodified Nicolau list and our thorough review clearly demonstrates that it doesn’t satisfy the fair and equitable requirements of McCaskill-Bond, nor is it fair for our pilot group as a whole.

The West members offered as a solution, that they be assigned to a West-only committee to advocate for the unmodified Nicolau award. The East members do not have the ability to approve or disapprove that request, but we told them we would present that request to the BPR. The next morning, before we had the chance to present this request to the BPR, they abruptly resigned via email in a letter (click here) that contained numerous inaccuracies.

The East committee members have consistently tried to engage the West committee members as we work toward a fair and equitable list, but we could not persuade them to consider alternative methodologies for seniority integration. During this meeting on the 29th, they made it clear they would only consider the unmodified Nicolau award. That unreasonable stance cannot serve the interests of all US Airways pilots and does not fulfill the duties of our Committee or USAPA’s Duty of Fair Representation to all US Airways pilots. All proposals made by this Committee must be, and will be fair for all pilots; not just West pilots and not just East pilots.We are continuously working toward a fair and equitable list which we will present as our case. At this time, nothing more has been decided beyond our conclusion that the unmodified Nicolau list is not an option. Regrettably, in spite of our effort to salvage their participation, in a letter to President Hummel, (click here) Chairman Pauley recommended he accept their resignation due to their unreasonable and inflexible stance.

Meaningful participation of any Merger Committee member requires the ability to be open-minded in order to explore and consider many aspects of how the lists may eventually be merged. If West participation on our Committee is limited to unwavering and unreasonable commitment to the unmodified Nicolau list, it obstructs our desire, goal, and ability to reach a fair and equitable SLI as required by McCaskill -Bond. Particularly after two court decisions holding to the contrary, continued strident pursuit for imposition of the Nicolau list is a disservice to all of our pilots.

It is our desire to have West members on our Committee who are committed to the McCaskill-Bond goals of a fair and equitable SLI for all US Airways and American pilots. If any West pilot feels they can make that commitment to work with us toward that goal, we would welcome them to the Committee. In the meantime, we will continue the work for a fair and equitable SLI for all pilots of the new American Airlines.

R57 relay
02-03-2014, 08:50 AM
Remember all we have to show is.................
WD at AWA

You guys have been saying that for what? 6 years? 6 years of legal fees and nothing.

Have you actually read Silver's ruling for yourself or do you just write checks and take AF/Os word for it?

"Turning to the present case, the West Pilots claim USAPA breached its duty of fair representation by “abandoning the existing obligation to use the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 267 at 11). For present purposes, the Court will assume such an obligation existed. Therefore, the question is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for that abandonment. As mentioned earlier, this would be an easier inquiry if USAPA had abandoned the Nicolau Award in favor of a different seniority regime. The Court could then compare the Nicolau Award to the new seniority regime and evaluate USAPA’s reasons for adopting the new regime. But the complicated state of affairs means that, at present, there is no new seniority regime directly comparable to the Nicolau Award. And, in fact, there never will be. The merger with American Airlines, combined with the terms of the MOU, means a new seniority regime will exist only after the McCaskill-Bond process is complete. That new seniority regime will include the thousands of pilots from American Airlines and it will be difficult to compare that regime to the Nicolau Award. Thus, the only question the Court can answerat this time is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for entering into the MOU.

It did."

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 09:03 AM
You guys decided to go to court! You decided Nic or nothing. So far, you got nothing. Accept that decision.

You asked over and over where you gave up your rights. I was waiting for you to man up and admit that you couldn't produce the Kirby numbers that were as good as the MOU. You couldn't because you didn't have them and they don't exist, but that will never happen. You aren't man enough to admit that you are wrong. So, according to the Judge you love so much, or at least when you are cherry picking her words, you didn't give up your rights. Even though you guys overwhelmingly voted for the MOU, you couldn't be held responsible. USAPA gave up the Nic. AND she found they weren't guilty of failure of DFR for doing so. She said that they had a, wait for it...........LEGITIMATE UNION PURPOSE for doing so..

We have a contract, an agreement. The MOU abandoned the Nic and has a tight timeline for the SLI. Honor your agreements.

Ok if you say so but could you please for the entire class show us where in the MOU it states that "west pilots by signing this document you agree to abandon your rights to the NIC award"??????

Still waiting

WD at AWA

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 09:06 AM
You guys have been saying that for what? 6 years? 6 years of legal fees and nothing.

Have you actually read Silver's ruling for yourself or do you just write checks and take AF/Os word for it?

"Turning to the present case, the West Pilots claim USAPA breached its duty of fair representation by “abandoning the existing obligation to use the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 267 at 11). For present purposes, the Court will assume such an obligation existed. Therefore, the question is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for that abandonment. As mentioned earlier, this would be an easier inquiry if USAPA had abandoned the Nicolau Award in favor of a different seniority regime. The Court could then compare the Nicolau Award to the new seniority regime and evaluate USAPA’s reasons for adopting the new regime. But the complicated state of affairs means that, at present, there is no new seniority regime directly comparable to the Nicolau Award. And, in fact, there never will be. The merger with American Airlines, combined with the terms of the MOU, means a new seniority regime will exist only after the McCaskill-Bond process is complete. That new seniority regime will include the thousands of pilots from American Airlines and it will be difficult to compare that regime to the Nicolau Award. Thus, the only question the Court can answerat this time is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for entering into the MOU.

It did."

Right because you never ever placed a list on the table to compare but now you must do so. The comparison will be made here once you do and you have no choice but to place something on the table. Now all you have to do is put is in a worst position and you get to see that inside of a court room again. No reason to be all mad and yelling.

WD at AWA

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 09:14 AM
The longer this conflict remains a dispute, the more delay in the SLI process with AA pilots. If the East doesn't put the Nic on the table I assume Leo will file a DFR suit which could take years. One question is if USAPA is neutered on schedule by the MOU and APA's single carrier filing, how can Leo sue an entity that no longer exists and is dissolved ? At that point, it would seem they'd have to set their sights on APA demanding it is then they that must accept the Nic. That could still take years.

Definitely interesting to watch this all play out and it could be many years before this SLI ever sees the light of day. It's just one of the many differences that the other SLI's don't have.

If you really look at this objectively you can see that the company and APA are doing what is necessary to remove usapa (the east) from the process due to the fact that they are completely unreasonable and unrealistic. APA need not file a DFR because they will be in control of the process. The east (usapa) wishes to pass on to APA their liability. The fastest way to end this and make sure we dont end up back before a court is to use the NIC in the SLI process. The east can huff and puff all they want but they have no case and never did. The Nic placed everyone fairly and they agreed to this process PRIOR anyway.

The use of the NIC in SLI will make sure we stay out of court, dont use it and we are back in federal court.

WD at AWA

R57 relay
02-03-2014, 09:44 AM
Right because you never ever placed a list on the table to compare but now you must do so. The comparison will be made here once you do and you have no choice but to place something on the table. Now all you have to do is put is in a worst position and you get to see that inside of a court room again. No reason to be all mad and yelling.

WD at AWA

No they don't have to, they have to place the listS in effect on the table, as it says in the document that we agreed to.

I'm not mad or yelling, simply expanding certain text so that maybe you will get a clue.

You were right about one thing, this isn't over. There are cards to be played and the biggest question is what are the company and APA going to do. I can't see why they would do anything other than comply with the MOU that Judge Silver said wasn't a DFR and keep their hands clean. But, we know how management and pilots are.

R57 relay
02-03-2014, 09:44 AM
Ok if you say so but could you please for the entire class show us where in the MOU it states that "west pilots by signing this document you agree to abandon your rights to the NIC award"??????

Still waiting

WD at AWA

You moron, I showed you what the agreement said. You filed a lawsuit over the abandonment of the Nic and lost.

Now, show me those super duper Kirby rates, or admit you pulled them from your rear. Or AOL's rear.

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 09:55 AM
You moron, I showed you what the agreement said. You filed a lawsuit over the abandonment of the Nic and lost.

Now, show me those super duper Kirby rates, or admit you pulled them from your rear. Or AOL's rear.

I can be all the names in the world that makes you feel better about who you. Oh you did? Where was the section that stated that by signing the west agrees to abandon their rights to the NIC?? I didnt see that part, point it out please! Just cut and paste FROM THE MOU...

You really need to learn to read man because I can see that reading comp is not a strong suit of yours.
WD at AWA

cactiboss
02-03-2014, 11:46 AM
You moron, I showed you what the agreement said. You filed a lawsuit over the abandonment of the Nic and lost.

Now, show me those super duper Kirby rates, or admit you pulled them from your rear. Or AOL's rear.

Why so angry? You won, just enjoy it.

eaglefly
02-03-2014, 01:03 PM
If you really look at this objectively you can see that the company and APA are doing what is necessary to remove usapa (the east) from the process due to the fact that they are completely unreasonable and unrealistic. APA need not file a DFR because they will be in control of the process. The east (usapa) wishes to pass on to APA their liability. The fastest way to end this and make sure we dont end up back before a court is to use the NIC in the SLI process. The east can huff and puff all they want but they have no case and never did. The Nic placed everyone fairly and they agreed to this process PRIOR anyway.

The use of the NIC in SLI will make sure we stay out of court, dont use it and we are back in federal court.

WD at AWA

I was referring to the possibility of Leo filing DFR against APA if they don't agree to accept the Nic during negotiations with East "representatives" or present the Nic to the arbitrator, if those fail. If USAPA doesn't exist by the time the actual SLI negotiations begins and APA is then the only bargaining agent at the point, who can Leo sue for DFR ?

It would seem only APA and as the TWA suit showed, that could take years. Could Leo file an injunction to stop the process until the Nic issue is resolved ?

If they can, could Parker, the NMB or anyone else override that and/or disregard a judges order for injunction ?

Again, that's why I think perhaps the West reps bailed. If they agree to continue the process agreeing that the Nic doesn't have to be considered, that would seem to undermine any future legal argument for its consideration in the future. To continue, they could be slitting their own throats for future legal challenge.

cactiboss
02-03-2014, 01:19 PM
I was referring to the possibility of Leo filing DFR against APA if they don't agree to accept the Nic during negotiations with East "representatives" or present the Nic to the arbitrator, if those fail. If USAPA doesn't exist by the time the actual SLI negotiations begins and APA is then the only bargaining agent at the point, who can Leo sue for DFR ?

It would seem only APA and as the TWA suit showed, that could take years. Could Leo file an injunction to stop the process until the Nic issue is resolved ?

If they can, could Parker, the NMB or anyone else override that and/or disregard a judges order for injunction ?

Again, that's why I think perhaps the West reps bailed. If they agree to continue the process agreeing that the Nic doesn't have to be considered, that would seem to undermine any future legal argument for its consideration in the future. To continue, they could be slitting their own throats for future legal challenge.

You get it. All I would argue is that the apa becomes responsible for dfr to the west the second they take over. Very simple way of avoiding any lawsuits is to provide a fair process that is inclusive of the wests claims to the Nic and let a neutral party decide

PurpleTurtle
02-03-2014, 01:45 PM
Right because you never ever placed a list on the table to compare but now you must do so. The comparison will be made here once you do and you have no choice but to place something on the table. ...
WD at AWA

No wonder your lawyers are fleecing you guys. You have no appreciation for accuracy in words. You are gullible.

Silver stated her assumption that there exists a DFR standard of comparing a list to the Nic. (She played you like a fiddle. There is no basis in law for her to find anyone guilty of a DFR based on a comparison to the Nic. A union's standard of DFR is "wide range of reasonableness, set by the SCOTUS. :) ) Silver's little word play in her dicta sandbox makes for great political pandering, because it is free from any review, affirmation, or dismissal in any appeals process. It is meaningless, except to AOL, Ferggie, Kontz, and Marty.... to get suckers to donate more money. :D

Cactuspilot.com "push for justice"
The shake down contributors list will be published soon. Don't fail to donate and risk having your name ostracized by the other gullible dupes. :D

PurpleTurtle
02-03-2014, 01:48 PM
I was referring to the possibility of Leo filing DFR against APA if they don't agree to accept the Nic during negotiations with East "representatives" or present the Nic to the arbitrator, if those fail. ....

Name one document that requires anyone, especially the APA, to use the Nic ever.. just one. ;)

eaglefly
02-03-2014, 01:49 PM
You get it. All I would argue is that the apa becomes responsible for dfr to the west the second they take over. Very simple way of avoiding any lawsuits is to provide a fair process that is inclusive of the wests claims to the Nic and let a neutral party decide

So then, what is APA's SPECIFIC DFR to the west ? If negotiations fail, what does the sole collective bargaining representative (APA) argue as ITS position in arbitration ?

They have to have SOME position to present to the arbitrators as to what THEY believe is "fair and equitable" and "preserves career expectations". If they present a position not specifically supporting the Nic or that is not in accordance with it, but allow it to be presented by others for consideration and remain neutral, does that meet Leo's needs or does Leo require APA to support the Nic specifically and file DFR against APA right then the minute they indicate they will not directly support the Nic ?

If Leo accepts simple neutral presentation to the arbitrator by APA of the Nic, but after SLI award the result isn't the Nic, does Leo go after APA after the fact for not specifically supporting it due to the result ?

I'm trying to figure out what Leo expects APA to directly do in regards to the Nic and thus the likelihood of constipating the SLI process.

eaglefly
02-03-2014, 01:56 PM
Name one document that requires anyone, especially the APA, to use the Nic ever.. just one. ;)

I haven't sifted through Silvers rulings or Leo's claims to be able to do that, nor is it worth my effort. The point is, ANYONE can file a lawsuit and seek an injunction of a process until resolution, even if that resolution is rejection of the injunction and that takes time. Another consideration is, what potential jeopardy dies APA believe themselves to be in, in this situation. I'm not saying you're wrong and you very well may be right, but the ultimate outcome is only one concern. The time it takes to get there is another and the expense and hassle are still more concerns.

USAPA gummed up your last SLI quite successfully and my questions revolve around how well Leo can do exactly the same with this SLI.

cactiboss
02-03-2014, 02:18 PM
They have to have SOME position to present to the arbitrators as to what THEY believe is "fair and equitable" and "preserves career expectations". If they present a position not specifically supporting the Nic or that is not in accordance with it, but allow it to be presented by others for consideration and remain neutral, does that meet Leo's needs or does Leo require APA to support the Nic specifically and file DFR against APA right then the minute they indicate they will not directly support the Nic ?

from what I understand the bolded part is correct as it allows the MB process to decide the east west list as spelled out in the mou.

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 02:39 PM
I was referring to the possibility of Leo filing DFR against APA if they don't agree to accept the Nic during negotiations with East "representatives" or present the Nic to the arbitrator, if those fail. If USAPA doesn't exist by the time the actual SLI negotiations begins and APA is then the only bargaining agent at the point, who can Leo sue for DFR ?

Well that's a good question on who can be sued. The issue is anyone can be sued at anytime for any reason. One thing is certain and that is usapa will no longer exist.

It would seem only APA and as the TWA suit showed, that could take years. Could Leo file an injunction to stop the process until the Nic issue is resolved ?

The TWA issue was far different and there was some sort of agreement between the parties. Now I think that the TWA pilots sued ALPA for not representing their interest in the AA buyout which allowed APA to use a 7 to 1 formula.

If they can, could Parker, the NMB or anyone else override that and/or disregard a judges order for injunction ?

If a court issues an injunction no they can no override the order and it would have to play out. They could file a motion to reconsider but these are almost always failures.

Again, that's why I think perhaps the West reps bailed. If they agree to continue the process agreeing that the Nic doesn't have to be considered, that would seem to undermine any future legal argument for its consideration in the future. To continue, they could be slitting their own throats for future legal challenge.

I can not speculate why they did what they did, I only that heard they left and I agree with that decision. I know that APA has no desire to inherit usapa's mess and the sure fire way to avoid that is to recognize the only seniority list accepted by the company, the NIC list.

WD at AWA

eaglefly
02-03-2014, 03:03 PM
I can not speculate why they did what they did, I only that heard they left and I agree with that decision. I know that APA has no desire to inherit usapa's mess and the sure fire way to avoid that is to recognize the only seniority list accepted by the company, the NIC list.

WD at AWA

My bet says they won't SPECIFICALLY take a side. They will have to present something THEY believe to be "fair and equitable" and that preserves "career expectations". I find it difficult for any legal action to ultimately require them to formally advocate for either of two sides in a dispute they did not create nor penalize them for not doing so. That's not to say Leo will not persue that or that it will take time, perhaps even years. Doing the above while also allowing the Nic to be introduced for additional consideration seems possible, but that still may not appease Leo who may gum the process anyway.

I'm betting on a slow crawl toward the AA/U SLI.

A321
02-03-2014, 07:20 PM
I can not speculate why they did what they did, I only that heard they left and I agree with that decision. I know that APA has no desire to inherit usapa's mess and the sure fire way to avoid that is to recognize the only seniority list accepted by the company, the NIC list.

WD at AWA

Right, because the APA pilots are so ready to have the unbalanced Nic blended into their seniority list.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/9a/9afae5e49689b2d1bfda49dddfe2aa0ae56e29a6a579f96cb7 d2c2ec8f5d90fb.jpg

Wiskey Driver
02-03-2014, 07:45 PM
Right, because the APA pilots are so ready to have the unbalanced Nic blended into their seniority list.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/9a/9afae5e49689b2d1bfda49dddfe2aa0ae56e29a6a579f96cb7 d2c2ec8f5d90fb.jpg

Hard to say what they want but we know what they DONT want!

WD at AWA

A321
02-03-2014, 10:09 PM
Hard to say what they want but we know what they DONT want!

WD at AWA

No, it's not hard to say what they want. They (like most humans) want something sensible, and fair.

Is the Nic sensible and fair?

Nope.

…according to the majority of US Air pilots, Judge Silver, APA, the company, McCaskill Bond ….pretty much everyone except "WD at AWA" and "Cactiboss" have realized that the Nic was an unfair seniority leap frog gain.

…flame on! Most people on here have realized that you will never stop…. and that's fine. I am not writing this post to argue with you, just to point out reality and sensibility to the hundreds of others that read your posts and disagree with you.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 02:16 AM
Where is the uproar over the west members of the merger committee not living up to their word? Are there no DL /ALPA warriors ready to take them on?

Wiskey Driver
02-04-2014, 03:22 AM
No, it's not hard to say what they want. They (like most humans) want something sensible, and fair.

Is the Nic sensible and fair?

Nope.

…according to the majority of US Air pilots, Judge Silver, APA, the company, McCaskill Bond ….pretty much everyone except "WD at AWA" and "Cactiboss" have realized that the Nic was an unfair seniority leap frog gain.

…flame on! Most people on here have realized that you will never stop…. and that's fine. I am not writing this post to argue with you, just to point out reality and sensibility to the hundreds of others that read your posts and disagree with you.

Hmmm Well I think you have that one really twisted up all wrong. According to THE EAST ONLY its not but to everyone else its binding arbitration son!

The award was not unfair and the court never ever said it was and if you think it did provide the quote from any court in the land that said that. The award slotted people according to where they were on their respective list. We have been over this time and time again and you think you will elevate your careers on the back of west pilots that had much brighter futures. Dont you forget that you are even here talking about this today as a result of AMERICAWEST, without which you would be unemployed or working in China.

Now I will leave you to go dig up all those quotes from the courts and the APA that states the award was unfair.

WD at AWA

Wiskey Driver
02-04-2014, 03:24 AM
Where is the uproar over the west members of the merger committee not living up to their word? Are there no DL /ALPA warriors ready to take them on?

Well to pull a page from the east MEC, DO YOU HAVE THIER WORD IN WRITING???????? We always put things like that in a resolution.

WD at AWA

freddyc10
02-04-2014, 04:44 AM
Whiskey, maybe you missed the question in a different thread so I will ask it here.
What is your position on the West list.
What is your position on the Nic list?
What is your position on a combined list using DOH?

Saabs
02-04-2014, 06:04 AM
Does anybody understand why whiskey driver feels obligated to call everyone "son"?

Sweatsock
02-04-2014, 06:12 AM
Does anybody understand why whiskey driver feels obligated to call everyone "son"?

In an internet environment it is usually used to try to convey that the poster is a good bit older/more experienced than he/she actually is in an attempt to gain validity to what they post.

Not saying that is what he/she is doing...just pointing out the most common use of such terms on the internet. Some interesting studies being done on the subject of social media in the last few years.

70Espada
02-04-2014, 07:51 AM
No, it's not hard to say what they want. They (like most humans) want something sensible, and fair.

Is the Nic sensible and fair?

Nope.

…according to the majority of US Air pilots, Judge Silver, APA, the company, McCaskill Bond ….pretty much everyone except "WD at AWA" and "Cactiboss" have realized that the Nic was an unfair seniority leap frog gain.


Ummmmm, actually Judge Silver said the opposite. She said USAPA doesn't have to use the Nic, but there's nothing wrong with using the Nic. The courts have ruled it's a valid list, it's just not a DFR yet, because USAPA hasn't not used the list. I think this is where a lot of east pilots just read/hear what they want. The courts have told USAPA repeatedly they don't have to use the Nic, BUT anything less than the Nic for the west pilots and the liable party is on dangerous ground. This is one BIG reason that the APA is hesitant to let USAPA throw the west in the closet and decide seniority on their own. Will it be the Nic? I don't know, but I haven't read one valid post on here explaining how it won't be.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 08:42 AM
"Turning to the present case, the West Pilots claim USAPA breached its duty of fair representation by “abandoning the existing obligation to use the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 267 at 11). For present purposes, the Court will assume such an obligation existed. Therefore, the question is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for that abandonment. As mentioned earlier, this would be an easier inquiry if USAPA had abandoned the Nicolau Award in favor of a different seniority regime. The Court could then comparetheNicolau Award to thenew seniorityregimeand evaluateUSAPA’s reasons for adopting the new regime. But the complicated state of affairs means that, at present, there is no new seniority regime directly comparable to the Nicolau Award. And,

in fact,there never will be. The merger with American Airlines, combined with the terms of the MOU, means a new seniority regime will exist only after the McCaskill-Bond process is complete. That new seniority regime will include the thousands of pilots from American Airlines and it will be difficult to compare that regime to the Nicolau Award.Thus,theonly question the Court can answerat this time is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for entering into the MOU. It did."

Did you miss all of that? Using the Nic would violate the MOU. USAPA will not use it. I can't say whether the APA and the company will try to use it, but that will certainly lead to a hybrid DFR. The only was to avoid a DFR is for everyone to use the MOU and let USAPA handle the US list, that way the APA 's hands are clean.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 08:44 AM
Well to pull a page from the east MEC, DO YOU HAVE THIER WORD IN WRITING???????? We always put things like that in a resolution.

WD at AWA


I know it will be hard, but try to think logically fir just a second. Would they have ever been put on the merger committee if they said "Nic or death! " in their interview?

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 08:46 AM
from what I understand the bolded part is correct as it allows the MB process to decide the east west list as spelled out in the mou.

The MOU does not spell out an east /west list. It specifically says there won't be one, just as Judge Silver repeated to you.

ForeverFO
02-04-2014, 08:50 AM
Does anybody understand why whiskey driver feels obligated to call everyone "son"?

Dunno, but crazy patronizing, and not going to win friends or influence people.

There's GOT to be an answer. The West blames the East for not giving the Nic a big hug, but that's like hugging an Arizona cactus.

For the West guys - simple question... is it fair that a 2003 West pilot is placed ahead of a 1987 East pilot who has been flying continuously from that year?

If by some twisted magic an AA new hire was plugged into our seniority list sixteen years advanced, you'd have a mutiny.

70Espada
02-04-2014, 08:58 AM
"Turning to the present case, the West Pilots claim USAPA breached its duty of fair representation by “abandoning the existing obligation to use the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 267 at 11). For present purposes, the Court will assume such an obligation existed. Therefore, the question is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for that abandonment. As mentioned earlier, this would be an easier inquiry if USAPA had abandoned the Nicolau Award in favor of a different seniority regime. The Court could then comparetheNicolau Award to thenew seniorityregimeand evaluateUSAPA’s reasons for adopting the new regime. But the complicated state of affairs means that, at present, there is no new seniority regime directly comparable to the Nicolau Award. And,

in fact,there never will be. The merger with American Airlines, combined with the terms of the MOU, means a new seniority regime will exist only after the McCaskill-Bond process is complete. That new seniority regime will include the thousands of pilots from American Airlines and it will be difficult to compare that regime to the Nicolau Award.Thus,theonly question the Court can answerat this time is whether USAPA had a legitimate union purpose for entering into the MOU. It did."

Did you miss all of that? Using the Nic would violate the MOU. USAPA will not use it. I can't say whether the APA and the company will try to use it, but that will certainly lead to a hybrid DFR. The only was to avoid a DFR is for everyone to use the MOU and let USAPA handle the US list, that way the APA 's hands are clean.

Once again, you're reading what you want into that. Like i said, no list yet, liability is still there. Why do you think the company and APA want the west to have a seat? Think about it. It doesn't have to be the Nic, but no matter how complex the final list is, the liability is still there if the Nic is not used and the west not properly represented. How many warnings from judges is it going to take?

70Espada
02-04-2014, 11:26 AM
Dunno, but crazy patronizing, and not going to win friends or influence people.

There's GOT to be an answer. The West blames the East for not giving the Nic a big hug, but that's like hugging an Arizona cactus.

For the West guys - simple question... is it fair that a 2003 West pilot is placed ahead of a 1987 East pilot who has been flying continuously from that year?

If by some twisted magic an AA new hire was plugged into our seniority list sixteen years advanced, you'd have a mutiny.

The east asks that question all the time and the problem is they pushed it to arbitration by trying to staple a younger pilot group using DOH. The policy of both of our unions at the time of the merger was career expectations. The arbitrator couldn't ignore that and his ruling was correct. Do i think personally if it's fair? I think the policy was flawed because it didn't put any value on their LOS or consider the amount of value US brought to the table. The arbitration was done correctly though.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 12:09 PM
Once again, you're reading what you want into that. Like i said, no list yet, liability is still there. Why do you think the company and APA want the west to have a seat? Think about it. It doesn't have to be the Nic, but no matter how complex the final list is, the liability is still there if the Nic is not used and the west not properly represented. How many warnings from judges is it going to take?


You have been one of the more reasonable west posters but take the Nic goggles off man!

I'm not reading anything into it, I'm simply reading. You team filed the lawsuit claiming that USAPA failed it's DFR by agreeing to the MOU that abandoned the Nic. Your claim. Judge Silver ruled that they did not. That's the 3rd loss in a row.
How many rulings do you need?

AOL keeps pinning it's hopes on catchphrases. LUP, remember that? Judge Silver told your lawyer in first hearing that USAPA had one and what it was. I showed cacti and WD where she said. They didn't listen.

But you have a big win. You prevented them from implementing an East /West DOH list.

The West HAS to have representation. How is the question. I'm thinking that USAPA should give you your own committee, but have you really thought out all the repercussions of that? Do you really want to be completely separate from us? Remember all the rhetoric back in 2005 about the past not counting for anything?

Blindly following AOL has cost you guys tons and if you continue to it may cost you more.

Capt Hindsight
02-04-2014, 12:16 PM
?... by trying to staple a younger pilot group using DOH.

???

"I don't think that word means what you think it means"

Inconceeevable,
Capt H

70Espada
02-04-2014, 12:18 PM
You have been one of the more reasonable west posters but take the Nic goggles off man!

I'm not reading anything into it, I'm simply reading. You team filed the lawsuit claiming that USAPA failed it's DFR by agreeing to the MOU that abandoned the Nic. Your claim. Judge Silver ruled that they did not. That's the 3rd loss in a row.
How many rulings do you need?

AOL keeps pinning it's hopes on catchphrases. LUP, remember that? Judge Silver told your lawyer in first hearing that USAPA had one and what it was. I showed cacti and WD where she said. They didn't listen.

But you have a big win. You prevented them from implementing an East /West DOH list.

The West HAS to have representation. How is the question. I'm thinking that USAPA should give you your own committee, but have you really thought out all the repercussions of that? Do you really want to be completely separate from us? Remember all the rhetoric back in 2005 about the past not counting for anything?

Blindly following AOL has cost you guys tons and if you continue to it may cost you more.

You seem to be one of the reasonable east pilots and your views on seniority have seemed to be consistent. I'll take your advice under consideration.

70Espada
02-04-2014, 12:21 PM
???

"I don't think that word means what you think it means"

Inconceeevable,
Capt H

16 year senior captain under an 18 year reserve FO. It would have been a staple job.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 12:35 PM
The east asks that question all the time and the problem is they pushed it to arbitration by trying to staple a younger pilot group using DOH. The policy of both of our unions at the time of the merger was career expectations. The arbitrator couldn't ignore that and his ruling was correct. Do i think personally if it's fair? I think the policy was flawed because it didn't put any value on their LOS or consider the amount of value US brought to the table. The arbitration was done correctly though.

The east no more pushed us into arbitration than the west did with it's line in the sand about the formerly furloughed. You guys proposed to staple 900 pilots that were active on the day of the merger. These urban ledgends get repeated so much.

LOS had been removed from the merger policy but not prohibited. What was to be avoided was windfall at the expense of orhers. Nic ignored that.

cactiboss
02-04-2014, 03:16 PM
Hey R57:

February 4, 2014


Fellow West Pilots:


On Saturday, the four East pilots on the USAPA Merger Committee posted a Merger Committee Update announcing what we had already announced – that we had resigned from the USAPA Merger Committee. That part of their Update was accurate. But that was the only part. The purpose of this letter is to correct the flat inaccuracies and to fill in the gaps of information in that Update. The quotes below come directly from the Update, followed by the truth.

• “While this Committee has always had differences regarding the equity and fairness of the unmodified Nicolau award, the West members have always told us they would consider other methods of integration once the courts ruled. They gave that assurance at the time they were appointed to the Committee and reaffirmed that commitment after their appointments.”

WRONG – When we were interviewed by the BPR for positions on the Merger Committee, we made clear in no uncertain terms that our role – and our only role – was to see to it that the Nicolau Award was the basis for any seniority integration with any other airline. When members of the BPR repeatedly quizzed us on this point, Pat Szymanski – one of USAPA’s lawyers – piped in and told the BPR that our position was perfectly clear and that the BPR should either appoint us or not, but that trying to change our minds through their interrogation was a waste of time. He was right. Our position on the Nicolau Award was clear from the start and never wavered.
• “We have, of course, considered the unmodified Nicolau list and our thorough review clearly demonstrates that it doesn’t satisfy the fair and equitable requirements of McCaskill-Bond, nor is it fair for our pilot group as a whole.”

WRONG – We have seen no analysis presented to, or produced by, the Committee demonstrating that the list produced by the Nicolau Award is not a fair and equitable basis for integrating the US Airways pilots with the American pilots. It was developed under a “fair and equitable” standard by the most respected seniority integration arbitrator in the country for the reasons and under the circumstances that were fully and accurately laid out in his Opinion. No one – no court, arbitrator or serious commentator, other than the East pilots - has said it is not a fair and equitable list. And by the way, as we hardly need tell you, since the Nicolau list was created, West pilots have not enjoyed its benefits and East pilots – who were on the brink of losing their jobs entirely before the merger with America West – have moved happily up the promotion ladder while West pilots have suffered furloughs and displacements. Dave Odell – who was a West first officer when list was issued – was furloughed for a period and is now back flying as an A-320 first officer. And East pilots who were below Dave and were on furlough when the list was issued and had no prospects of ever flying for US Airways again before the merger – are now flying as Captains.

• “During the meeting, the East members repeatedly offered to have [the two of us] review and consider a series of potential SLI methods.”

This is a correct, but a telling statement. We have been on the Merger Committee for eight months. At no point at any meeting that we were at did the Committee develop any integration scenarios; we never even discussed any. But obviously someone had; quite plainly the four East members of the Committee, apparently behind our backs, have developed a “series of potential SLI methods.” If we were supposed to be working collaboratively, how did it come to be that by January 29 there were a “series of potential SLI methods” already developed that we had never heard about?

• “The West members offered as a solution, that they be assigned to a West-only committee to advocate for the unmodified Nicolau award. The East members do not have the ability to approve or disapprove that request, but we told them we would present that request to the BPR. The next morning, before we had the chance to present this request to the BPR, they abruptly resigned via email in a letter that contained numerous inaccuracies.”

We did tell the four East members of the Merger Committee that, if the Committee itself was not going to use the Nicolau Award as a basis for the integration with American, the only fair way to proceed was to create a procedural framework under the Protocol Agreement it was negotiating with APA and the Company that provided for three Merger Committees – an American Committee, an East Committee and a West Committee – thereby allowing the West pilots to advance the Nicolau Award as a basis for integration with the American pilots. That process would put to rest, once and for all, claims that the Nicolau Award was not a fair basis on which to integrate the US Airways list with the American list. If it wasn’t fair, the arbitrators in that case would say so by not using it. The four East Members of the Merger Committee did tell us that they did not have the power to do that (although we do not know why they didn’t have that power – they have been developing and negotiating all other terms of the Protocol Agreement) and would present it to the BPR. But, to quote them “before [they] had the chance to present this request to the BPR” they submitted a proposed Protocol Agreement to APA – over our stated objection – that called for only two Merger Committees – a USAPA Merger Committee and an APA Merger Committee. What is more, they rejected our extremely modest request to put into their proposed Protocol Agreement a provision that would have required the identification of a pilot who was on the Nicolau list and where he would be on that list in the collection and exchange of data with APA. When they sent that proposed Protocol Agreement to APA over our objection, we felt we had no option other than to resign from a Committee that, from the start, had no intention at all in representing the West pilots’ interests.


Perhaps the East pilots on the Merger Committee will present our three-committee proposal to the BPR and perhaps the BPR will adopt it and offer it to APA (who, by their proposed draft seem to have endorsed at least the idea of such an approach). If it does and if APA and the Company accept it, there will be no need for us to serve on the East Merger Committee – the West will have its own Committee. If it does not, we have no interest in serving on a USAPA Merger Committee that will not consider the West pilots’ legitimate interest in having the Nicolau Award at least considered in the upcoming seniority integration process. The point is that either way the BPR decides to go on this point, our usefulness on the Merger Committee, to whatever extent it might have ever been useful, was over.
The BPR has solicited other volunteers from among the West pilot group. Of course, every pilot has to decide for him or herself whether to accept that invitation. But before anyone does consider it, we urge you to read this letter again carefully and think about whether – in light of our experience – you truly feel that the USAPA Merger Committee is headed in a direction that you can endorse.


Ken Stravers

Rocky CalveryPlease refer to bold part and compare to latest usapa mc update to see where the apa is headed.

Wiskey Driver
02-04-2014, 04:31 PM
Whiskey, maybe you missed the question in a different thread so I will ask it here.
What is your position on the West list.
What is your position on the Nic list?
What is your position on a combined list using DOH?

I did answer you. Didn't I??

WD at AWA

Wiskey Driver
02-04-2014, 04:37 PM
I know it will be hard, but try to think logically fir just a second. Would they have ever been put on the merger committee if they said "Nic or death! " in their interview?

I have no idea, seriously. What I can tell is that if it were something like that we would have put it in a resolution. Now if you have that in a resolution conversation over and you have a valid point.

WD at AWA

Wiskey Driver
02-04-2014, 04:37 PM
I know it will be hard, but try to think logically fir just a second. Would they have ever been put on the merger committee if they said "Nic or death! " in their interview?

I have no idea, seriously. What I can tell you is that if it were something like that we would have put it in a resolution. Now if you have that in a resolution conversation over and you have a valid point.

WD at AWA

freddyc10
02-04-2014, 05:19 PM
I did answer you. Didn't I??

WD at AWA

I don't think so. If I missed it, I'm sorry.

PurpleTurtle
02-04-2014, 05:33 PM
Hey R57:
Please refer to bold part and compare to latest usapa mc update to see where the apa is headed.

Why? They resigned and now want me to read a long winded rant... I could just read WD posts here on this board. :D

cactusmike
02-04-2014, 05:52 PM
The east no more pushed us into arbitration than the west did with it's line in the sand about the formerly furloughed. You guys proposed to staple 900 pilots that were active on the day of the merger. These urban ledgends get repeated so much.

LOS had been removed from the merger policy but not prohibited. What was to be avoided was windfall at the expense of orhers. Nic ignored that.

What are you talking about? Nicolau did not put 600 active East pilots under Dave O'Dell. Those guys were furloughed as of the snapshot date.

70Espada
02-04-2014, 06:26 PM
What are you talking about? Nicolau did not put 600 active East pilots under Dave O'Dell. Those guys were furloughed as of the snapshot date.

I think he is talking about the original west proposal for the arbitration, not the final ruling.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 07:21 PM
What are you talking about? Nicolau did not put 600 active East pilots under Dave O'Dell. Those guys were furloughed as of the snapshot date.

Nic goggles affect reading comprehension too.

I said YOU guys proposed it, Nicolau didn't use it. That youto guys were a factor in forcing arbitration.

However he did use the list from 2007, not the snapshot. By them we had lost almost twice as mant airframes as you, but recalled about 300 pilots. Those pilots were the only ones held to their 2005 status and subject if Brucia's dissent.

R57 relay
02-04-2014, 07:22 PM
I think he is talking about the original west proposal for the arbitration, not the final ruling.

Correct, thanks.

cactusmike
02-04-2014, 10:31 PM
Ok, cool. But, like the CAL/UAL arbitration, it really doesn't matter what your proposal is, it's what the final product looks like. Both sides can ask for the other to be stapled, the arbitrator(s) will decide according to the facts in the case tempered with past rulings to decide the final list.

Nic goggles? Really? Pardon me for waiting to see if the arbitrated list gets tossed. No one has done that yet, definitively. There's still a lot more game to go. I will play this out until the end and if I lose, so be it. I'll still be a captain, like I have been for 23 plus years, and now I'll be making 200 bucks an hour very shortly. And I will have gone through this period never having said the words "US Airways" in a PA. I will be very happy to dump that name.

Wiskey Driver
02-04-2014, 11:43 PM
Ok, cool. But, like the CAL/UAL arbitration, it really doesn't matter what your proposal is, it's what the final product looks like. Both sides can ask for the other to be stapled, the arbitrator(s) will decide according to the facts in the case tempered with past rulings to decide the final list.

Nic goggles? Really? Pardon me for waiting to see if the arbitrated list gets tossed. No one has done that yet, definitively. There's still a lot more game to go. I will play this out until the end and if I lose, so be it. I'll still be a captain, like I have been for 23 plus years, and now I'll be making 200 bucks an hour very shortly. And I will have gone through this period never having said the words "US Airways" in a PA. I will be very happy to dump that name.

Well stated Cactus Mike. We all know that relay is a benefactor of usapa's crap so its no wonder he puckers up to them. The one thing that is sure and certain that is usapa will be swept out the door and the usair name dead and gone. Ok that was two things.

WD at AWA

R57 relay
02-05-2014, 02:54 AM
Ok, cool. But, like the CAL/UAL arbitration, it really doesn't matter what your proposal is, it's what the final product looks like. Both sides can ask for the other to be stapled, the arbitrator(s) will decide according to the facts in the case tempered with past rulings to decide the final list.

Nic goggles? Really? Pardon me for waiting to see if the arbitrated list gets tossed. No one has done that yet, definitively. There's still a lot more game to go. I will play this out until the end and if I lose, so be it. I'll still be a captain, like I have been for 23 plus years, and now I'll be making 200 bucks an hour very shortly. And I will have gone through this period never having said the words "US Airways" in a PA. I will be very happy to dump that name.

Never used Us Airways huh? Bet you cashed the checks that said it, huh?


I'll be glad to dump the ridiculous call sign.

Grow up.

cactiboss
02-05-2014, 07:21 AM
Never used Us Airways huh? Bet you cashed the checks that said it, huh?



Grow up.

Our checks say America West on them to this day. BTW, why are the east pilots allowed to ignore a binding arbitration by taking over yet you think the apa isn't allowed to modify the mou or interpret it anyway they so choose? Talk about blinders.

70Espada
02-05-2014, 08:57 AM
Our checks say America West on them to this day. BTW, why are the east pilots allowed to ignore a binding arbitration by taking over yet you think the apa isn't allowed to modify the mou or interpret it anyway they so choose? Talk about blinders.

??? I just turned my forms in to our CPA and all of
my stuff said US Airways. Don't tell me there's a fourth list!?! :)

cactiboss
02-05-2014, 09:19 AM
??? I just turned my forms in to our CPA and all of
my stuff said US Airways. Don't tell me there's a fourth list!?! :)

The monthly cheques have America west stamped on them still don't they?

Godzilla
02-05-2014, 11:54 AM
Never used Us Airways huh? Bet you cashed the checks that said it, huh?


I'll be glad to dump the ridiculous call sign.

Grow up.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Career advancement, money and maybe better hotels matter period.

Call signs and Company name, who cares?

R57 relay
02-05-2014, 12:07 PM
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Career advancement, money and maybe better hotels matter period.

Call signs and Company name, who cares?

How is that the pot calling the kettle black? Are you talking about AA or AW? Either way I'm still not making as much as I did in 2001, holding the same bid and in some pretty crappy hotels. You?

I'm looking forward to the future though.

R57 relay
02-05-2014, 12:09 PM
Our checks say America West on them to this day. BTW, why are the east pilots allowed to ignore a binding arbitration by taking over yet you think the apa isn't allowed to modify the mou or interpret it anyway they so choose? Talk about blinders.

The east pilots weren't able to ignore binding arbitration, until the MOU. Then they decided that the quagmire they were in wasn't worth staying in and allowing AA to get all the benefits, so we amended our contract.

Remember I said that absent the MOU I thought USAPA would lose on the Nic award.

PurpleTurtle
02-05-2014, 12:59 PM
The east pilots weren't able to ignore binding arbitration, until the MOU. Then they decided that the quagmire they were in wasn't worth staying in and allowing AA to get all the benefits, so we amended our contract.

Remember I said that absent the MOU I thought USAPA would lose on the Nic award.

Now that the West understands the courts allow a union to negotiate changes to a contract they are pinning their hopes on the APA to negotiate in a way favorable to the West.

Sounds like the West should send their donations to APA instead of AOL. :D

Godzilla
02-05-2014, 01:47 PM
[QUOTE=R57 relay;1574949]How is that the pot calling the kettle black?

I'll be glad to dump the ridiculous call sign.

Grow up.

By making the statement above.

cactiboss
02-05-2014, 02:23 PM
[QUOTE=R57 relay;1574949]How is that the pot calling the kettle black?

I'll be glad to dump the ridiculous call sign.

Grow up.

By making the statement above.

Their true colors always shine thru.

morecowbell
02-05-2014, 03:14 PM
Now that the West understands the courts allow a union to negotiate changes to a contract they are pinning their hopes on the APA to negotiate in a way favorable to the West.

Sounds like the West should send their donations to APA instead of AOL. :D

Hey....scumbag. Its not that the west is pinning its hopes on the APA to negotiate in a way favorable to it, it's more that the west is hoping the APA has more integrity then the scab east pilots.

Maybe, just maybe the APA will recognize that final and binding arbitration, as well as a list the company accepted (the Nic) is the best way to proceed.

The west will gladly fund the APA, rather then that abortion of a union called usapa.

PurpleTurtle
02-05-2014, 06:08 PM
Hey....scumbag. Its not that the west is pinning its hopes on the APA to negotiate in a way favorable to it, it's more that the west is hoping the APA has more integrity then the scab east pilots.

Maybe, just maybe the APA will recognize that final and binding arbitration, as well as a list the company accepted (the Nic) is the best way to proceed.

The west will gladly fund the APA, rather then that abortion of a union called usapa.

Welcome to the boards! We always appreciate a new perspective. :D

Don't forget to donate. Cactuspilot.com

PurpleTurtle
02-05-2014, 06:17 PM
The east pilots weren't able to ignore binding arbitration, until the MOU. Then they decided that the quagmire they were in wasn't worth staying in and allowing AA to get all the benefits, so we amended our contract.

Remember I said that absent the MOU I thought USAPA would lose on the Nic award.

Yes we all agreed to amend the contract (even ratified it with full BPR approval and membership ratification).

Now Marty is begging the BPR to ignore the MOU and replace it with an arbitration over the Nic or DOH, to be entered without BPR review or membership ratification.

They scream "integrity" about changing the previous 2005 TA (a change they voted 98% for) and now are begging for a change to the new TA, but don't want any voting on their proposal.

Integrity paragoons! :D

cactusmike
02-05-2014, 06:21 PM
The monthly cheques have America west stamped on them still don't they?

Nope, not since 2008.

Read files just got changed from AWA last year, though and I think the bid packets still say AWA somewhere.

R57 relay
02-05-2014, 06:24 PM
[QUOTE=R57 relay;1574949]How is that the pot calling the kettle black?

I'll be glad to dump the ridiculous call sign.

Grow up.

By making the statement above.

The above is based on experience. When Parker announced that we were going to keep the cactus call sign, I thought "Whatever, doesn't really matter. Speedbird, Springbok....lots of different call signs, let them have something." Then on the first day of the new call sign I had a high level RA in Mexico and the controllers wouldn't answer me because of the confusion. The safest course of action is for the call sign to match what is written on the side of the airplane, and that is what we should have done back then.

I use the full cactus call sign. Told a F/O to stop saying Catfish, and I have heard Cat****. Just no reason for it and won't be sad to see it go.

And on that note, nobody gets my goat about cheering for the loss of US Airways or USAPA. Never wanted to work for US Air, got there by merger and made the best of it, like someone with big boy pants. Same with USAPA.

cactusmike
02-05-2014, 06:31 PM
[QUOTE=Godzilla;1575026]

The above is based on experience. When Parker announced that we were going to keep the cactus call sign, I thought "Whatever, doesn't really matter. Speedbird, Springbok....lots of different call signs, let them have something." Then on the first day of the new call sign I had a high level RA in Mexico and the controllers wouldn't answer me because of the confusion. The safest course of action is for the call sign to match what is written on the side of the airplane, and that is what we should have done back then.

I use the full cactus call sign. Told a F/O to stop saying Catfish, and I have heard Cat****. Just no reason for it and won't be sad to see it go.

And on that note, nobody gets my goat about cheering for the loss of US Airways or USAPA. Never wanted to work for US Air, got there by merger and made the best of it, like someone with big boy pants. Same with USAPA.

Because "US Airways" rolls off the tongue so easily?

The FAA prefers short call signs with no more than two syllables. Cactus is a lot easier to say. I realize you guys had issues with the simple change but that's to be expected. Considering AWA 747s flew all over the world with that call sign safely (best record in the industry) and we fly many flights in and out of Mexico with zero issues I'd have to say that your single issue with the call sign was a very small anomaly. And if your fellow east pilots chose to mangle the call sign it's just another sign of the professionalism they have demonstrated.

R57 relay
02-05-2014, 06:40 PM
[QUOTE=R57 relay;1575231]

Because "US Airways" rolls off the tongue so easily?

The FAA prefers short call signs with no more than two syllables. Cactus is a lot easier to say. I realize you guys had issues with the simple change but that's to be expected. Considering AWA 747s flew all over the world with that call sign safely (best record in the industry) and we fly many flights in and out of Mexico with zero issues I'd have to say that your single issue with the call sign was a very small anomaly. And if your fellow east pilots chose to mangle the call sign it's just another sign of the professionalism they have demonstrated.

It was US Air genius. I guess you didn't know that the company screwed up the strip ATC got.

Oh yeah, I forgot that massive 747 operation you had........that's what put you into Chapter 11, wasn't it? You remember the cactus was there once too?


I never understood why you guys liked calling yourselves pricks until I became familiar with a few web board posters.

757HI
02-05-2014, 06:45 PM
…I check out for a few days, and come back to this? Callsigns??

YGTBSM

InformationEcho
02-06-2014, 11:00 AM
[QUOTE=R57 relay;1575231]

Considering AWA 747s flew all over the world with that call sign

I can honestly say I don't every recall seeing an AWA 74 at LHR or FRA...plenty of PAA and TWA 74's back in the days of yore, but no AWA 74's.

Fascinating.

cactiboss
02-06-2014, 11:56 AM
[QUOTE=cactusmike;1575240]

I can honestly say I don't every recall seeing an AWA 74 at LHR or FRA...plenty of PAA and TWA 74's back in the days of yore, but no AWA 74's.

Fascinating.

Well if you personally didn't see one it must not have happened.

eaglefly
02-06-2014, 12:11 PM
…I check out for a few days, and come back to this? Callsigns??

YGTBSM

Uniforms are next. :rolleyes:

ForeverFO
02-06-2014, 02:14 PM
Uniforms are next. :rolleyes:

I think only military pilots should be getting interviews at "The New AA."

Sliceback
02-06-2014, 02:26 PM
[QUOTE=InformationEcho;1575704]

Well if you personally didn't see one it must not have happened.


All over the world?? How about telling us when and where it happened?

kingairip
02-06-2014, 02:30 PM
I think only military pilots should be getting interviews at "The New AA."

I see what you did there! Pull pin, toss grenade, duck and cover!

(Much easier just to say "The Nic had better be used or else!!" or "No WAY is the Nic getting used!!" ;) )

R57 relay
02-06-2014, 02:59 PM
I think only military pilots should be getting interviews at "The New AA."

Good thing I don't have to apply again, I'd never get hired now.

We don't have to wear "Acquired, not hired!" buttons like the UA pilots wanted up to back in 2000, do we?

cactiboss
02-06-2014, 03:48 PM
[QUOTE=cactiboss;1575749]


All over the world?? How about telling us when and where it happened?

To stupid to use google?

cactiboss
02-06-2014, 03:49 PM
We don't have to wear "Acquired, not hired!" buttons like the UA pilots wanted up to back in 2000, do we?A scarlet U letter would be appropriate

R57 relay
02-06-2014, 04:21 PM
A scarlet U letter would be appropriate

I hate to break it to you, you have it too. In addition to the Scab AW.

Sliceback
02-06-2014, 04:39 PM
[QUOTE=Sliceback;1575884]

To stupid to use google?


Nope. Tried Google. Google's to stupid to show it, unless it didn't happen.

Bad-Andy
02-07-2014, 03:57 AM
Here's where they went:

Route Profile: America West Boeing 747 Routes | Airline Route (http://airlineroute.net/2012/06/18/rp-hp747/)

Flew them? Yes. Internationally? Yes. "All around the world?" Seems like a little stretch to me...

Okay, back to the oh so productive bickering...

R57 relay
02-07-2014, 05:58 AM
I think the around the world thing came from charters. Thing is, I'm pretty sure they helped put AWA into Chp 11. Bigger has proven to not always be better, especially with 747s.

kme9418
02-07-2014, 06:02 AM
[QUOTE=cactiboss;1575959]


Nope. Tried Google. Google's to stupid to show it, unless it didn't happen.

That would be "too" stupid, guys. That makes two stupid guys.

cactiboss
02-07-2014, 07:01 AM
I think the around the world thing came from charters. Thing is, I'm pretty sure they helped put AWA into Chp 11. Bigger has proven to not always be better, especially with 747s.

That's right, they were chartered all over and also provided lift for gulf war.