Originally Posted by wjcandee

You know, I keep reading all these interpretations of the ruling. But I have actually read all the rulings. The most-salient synopsis is the Court's own synopsis of its prior rulings when the Union challenged the TRO.

You can read it too. It is here: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ohsd-1_16-cv-01096/pdf/USCOURTS-ohsd-1_16-cv-01096-1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiFucqV7pXjAhVPHc0KHYC2CPEQFjAAegQ IAxAB&usg=AOvVaw1THR-f0UhiBNcuQcjcHUle

It says pretty unequivocally that the three issues were all "minor disputes" in the rubric of the RLA that needed to be resolved by arbitration. It also says that there is no status quo violation by the Company on any of those three issues. As to the legality of the strike, in an earlier order, the Court stated that it had the power to enjoin illegal strikes, and then issued the injunction. For those who say the court never said the strike was illegal, that's the deduction that a higher court would make in evaluating the Court's reasoning. In other words, the court did in fact determine this strike to be illegal, which is why it enjoined it. Also the courts opinion of major or minor with Republicans in office that are certainly not pro union means jack s#!t. We were and still are in sec 6 negotiations...you have to have b@!!s enough to protect what's your.

I read so much about that strike, I think putting up a viewpoint based on the actual Court rulings might be helpful for folks.

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog

the pilot group not the court has the right to determine a status quo violation

Originally Posted by Boris Badenov

Hahahahahaa. Yeah, tell that to the court. Or the sheriff who the court will call to come lock up your union hall. Or the bank which the court will call to empty your union account.

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog

Hahahahahaa. Yeah we did......the Judge ordered the company to settle all three items.

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog

Hahahahahaa. Yeah we did......the Judge ordered the company to settle all three items and then the company paid out hugh amounts of cash to the pilot group as part of that settlement. So neither of your two scenarios happened. Try again. You might have to grow a pair first. Hahahahahahahaa.

Originally Posted by wjcandee

Um...no he didn't. He found that the company had already reached agreement as to how to handle those issues. The strike was a strategic gambit by the Union with a number of motivating factors. But it's not like the entire membership was up in arms over when you got to take your Baby Days. The alleged status quo violations were a basis to go forward on a strike that Union leadership very much wanted to have, not a reaction to those "minor issues" under the RLA, which were legally required to be worked out through negotiation and did not form a basis for a legal strike. What's important is that ABX crew members do believe that the strike was a good thing to do and, legal or not, they seem to be happy that they did it. And to a certain extent, that's all that matters.

Originally Posted by goinaround

I wish there were a way to block discussions of the ABX strike that happened 3 years ago. It's getting reeeeeally tired at this point.......

Originally Posted by b707guy

He also ordered you all back to work, as "it simply reaffirms that the pilots cannot strike with respect to the three minor disputes discussed herein".