There were no search warrants served on any pilots. 49 pilots were served notice that they were being sued.

 

Show me the PWA reference that says gravity exists.

Oh, well I guess it doesn't.

Keep thinking that if you want. You're 100% wrong though, and so much so that its not even worth debating. I've literally done what you are pontificating about dozens and dozens and dozens of times. You are allowed (and encouraged) to put in blanket GS requests, for ALL bases at the same time. When they call, tell them where you are and if it works you'll get it and if not they move on no jeopardy.

If they didn't have blanket GS guys, they'd have to Junior Assign WAY more trips. As in the robocaller vortex of no return. LOL. Yeah, that one.

Everyone gets that except you for some reason. So feel free to adjust your GS requests hourly as you travel around town, have a drink, get tired, have things come up, etc. Don't forget to include a rolling 10 hour rest window that adjusts live and real time IAW your schedule as it develops. Other pilots who get your GS will thank you, and so will crew skeds for saving them 10 minutes.

Still waiting on that DALPA declatory judgement saying blanket GS are illegal unless you are in position to do 100% of any possible trip imaginable.

 

Lessee..... sue your employee and then turn 'em loose with 20 mil worth of capital and 60 + mil in liabilities.......Sounds like a great biz plan...

 

really?

then I guess the personal experience related to me by one of the 49 didn't happen. or maybe its senility setting in...

 

I usually don't side with Sailing but I have to on this one because he is spot on correct. Either the "one of the 49" was exaggerating what actually happened or "the one of the 49" has no idea as to the difference between a search warrant and a subpoena .

A search warrant is a legal instrument obtained by law enforcement from a judge during the course of a criminal investigation in pursuit of evidence believed to support criminal charges. A subpoena (more specifically, a subpoena duces tecum) is an order, usually drafted by an attorney, compelling a party or witness to produce certain documents.

When the company filed for a temporary injunction against the 49 and the "No OT" campaign in Federal District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, the company was seeking a civil remedy. A civil remedy is obviously not a criminal matter so no search warrants would have been issued. However, I would not be surprised if each of the 49 named defendants was served a subpoena duces tecum and thereby ordered to produce emails and any other correspondance or documentation which the company believed would support its argument for the TRO.

 

my legal expertise consists of a stint as a process server...and a sibling who is an attorney. the event described to me was officials appearing at the personal residence with legal papers that provided for confiscation of personal records and any means of electronic transmission.

call it what you want....as the admonitions from the most recent amendment process indicate its still a hammer held by management. and I wonder how many other employees let alone schedulers are even aware of its existence.

 

First, unlike your irrelevant gravity comparison, as previously stated, 23.Q.8.A expressly states, "A pilot will be obligated to fly a GS or GSWC rotation if he is...notified of and acknowledges the award." This is also supported in the Delta Pilots' Scheduling Reference Handbook (June 2017, Rev 5) on page 42 where that document expressly states that a GS/GSWC is "Not a proffer."

Now, that being said, current and past practice by the company has not held pilots who submit blanket GS/GSWC requests to the same obligations as, say, a WS assigned with more than 12 hours. It would be very hard for the company to now start treating verbally acknowledged GS calls (as opposed to acknowledging through iCrew where you are committed..or do you disagree with that premise as well?) as a hard and fast obligation and thus a failure to report if you don't accept. However, Cycle is 100% correct that, by the terms of the PWA and the SRH, a GS/GSWC is not a proffer.

Further, while you are certainly permitted to put in blanket GS/GSWC requests, I would be hard pressed to recall a time when I was "encouraged" to do so.

 

This thread has encouraged me to do so...zat count?

 

In your stint as a process server, I am willing to bet you never "served" a search warrant.

I have no doubt the individual was served the subpoena at his personal residence but, unlike your previous post, it was not by Federal LEOs in the dark of night. Does sound dramatic though and makes for good print but, in fact, anyone 18 years or older who isn't a party to the action can serve a federal subpoena. You probably even served a few in your stint as a process server.

Unlike a search warrant whereby relevant documents can be "confiscated," a subpoena requires you to produce documents to the court. Granted there is the threat of civil contempt but those "officials" could not "confiscate" those documents.

The hammer held by management is actually the RLA. The 2001 injunction was the company running to court to enforce the RLA. Even if there were another "No OT" campaign, the company would have to seek a new injunction by proferring new evidence against new pilot-defendants.

 

Of course!

Thinking the iCrew template should be whittled down to..."Do you want a GS? Yes/No" 😁