Delta Pilots Association
12-14-2013 | 07:28 AM
#8951
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
But luckily for TWA pilots, one laptop was missed during the data deletion process.
Carl
12-14-2013 | 09:03 AM
#8952
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
From: ATL 330 A
The APA pilots had a "veto" clause in their PWA regarding post merger SLI. They controlled the entire process at a time before Bond-McCaskill was written, and would be the sole arbiters of the new seniority list.
The TWA pilots could either accept AMR's terms, or they could take a little trip to Chapter 7 and interview for their former positions.
The TWA pilots dismissed their counsel from ALPA legal, hired new ones, and sued everyone in sight. Those actions are a bit wanting against the background of a dozen years with no profit, three bankruptcies, and Carl Icahn bleeding them dry.
No one had the lawful power to abrogate the PWA at American. It is delusional to think that the American pilots would offer terms that damaged their own members while they held the power to dictate perms.
Additionally, nothing ALPA did, or wrote in any emails, would alter the equation for the TWA pilots in their new seniority list. This is classic scapegoating.
I interned at TWA in the mid-nineties; I showed up dewy-eyed about the prospects of getting a foot in the door with a legacy carrier. Three months later I left with an indispensable notion of what a doomed company looks like.
The TWA pilots could either accept AMR's terms, or they could take a little trip to Chapter 7 and interview for their former positions.
The TWA pilots dismissed their counsel from ALPA legal, hired new ones, and sued everyone in sight. Those actions are a bit wanting against the background of a dozen years with no profit, three bankruptcies, and Carl Icahn bleeding them dry.
No one had the lawful power to abrogate the PWA at American. It is delusional to think that the American pilots would offer terms that damaged their own members while they held the power to dictate perms.
Additionally, nothing ALPA did, or wrote in any emails, would alter the equation for the TWA pilots in their new seniority list. This is classic scapegoating.
I interned at TWA in the mid-nineties; I showed up dewy-eyed about the prospects of getting a foot in the door with a legacy carrier. Three months later I left with an indispensable notion of what a doomed company looks like.
12-14-2013 | 09:13 AM
#8953
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
The APA pilots had a "veto" clause in their PWA regarding post merger SLI. They controlled the entire process at a time before Bond-McCaskill was written, and would be the sole arbiters of the new seniority list.
The TWA pilots could either accept AMR's terms, or they could take a little trip to Chapter 7 and interview for their former positions.
The TWA pilots dismissed their counsel from ALPA legal, hired new ones, and sued everyone in sight. Those actions are a bit wanting against the background of a dozen years with no profit, three bankruptcies, and Carl Icahn bleeding them dry.
No one had the lawful power to abrogate the PWA at American. It is delusional to think that the American pilots would offer terms that damaged their own members while they held the power to dictate perms.
Additionally, nothing ALPA did, or wrote in any emails, would alter the equation for the TWA pilots in their new seniority list. This is classic scapegoating.
I interned at TWA in the mid-nineties; I showed up dewy-eyed about the prospects of getting a foot in the door with a legacy carrier. Three months later I left with an indispensable notion of what a doomed company looks like.
The TWA pilots could either accept AMR's terms, or they could take a little trip to Chapter 7 and interview for their former positions.
The TWA pilots dismissed their counsel from ALPA legal, hired new ones, and sued everyone in sight. Those actions are a bit wanting against the background of a dozen years with no profit, three bankruptcies, and Carl Icahn bleeding them dry.
No one had the lawful power to abrogate the PWA at American. It is delusional to think that the American pilots would offer terms that damaged their own members while they held the power to dictate perms.
Additionally, nothing ALPA did, or wrote in any emails, would alter the equation for the TWA pilots in their new seniority list. This is classic scapegoating.
I interned at TWA in the mid-nineties; I showed up dewy-eyed about the prospects of getting a foot in the door with a legacy carrier. Three months later I left with an indispensable notion of what a doomed company looks like.
Carl
12-14-2013 | 12:23 PM
#8954
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 972
Likes: 1
From: 7ERA
DPA isn't silent about it. It's on the website's FAQ's. DPA will have a "clean slate" policy regarding scabs. Unfortunately, there's nothing to be done legally about them now. DPA would not have a legal leg to stand on if they tried to block scabs from being members...once ALPA has allowed them to be members at Delta.
Carl
Carl
What makes you think that ALPA has allowed this EAL scab who wrote a DPA testimonial to be a member? He wasn't on the CAL seniority list when they rejoined ALPA. Those were the only ones who got a clean slate (which I find repugnant). It had no effect, to my knowledge, on the membership opportunities for scabs at other properties at the time like United, NWA, Delta, etc. Am I wrong on that? My friends at United said their scabs remained non-members after CAL came back to ALPA.
All of that is pure deflection from the fact that the DPA has stated that they intend to allow known scabs a clean slate within their organization and have gone so far as to disseminate a testimonial for the organization written by an EAL scab who is not a member of ALPA. Whether it has happened previously in history or not, why would this be considered a good idea for a new union? It doesn't make sense to me.
12-15-2013 | 12:15 PM
#8956
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Yes, it is true. During testimony when ALPA people were asked why they destroyed material evidence, they stated it was done during the normal course of deleting emails and other data. ALPA claimed they couldn't be held liable because they didn't know it was wrong for them to do so...therefore there was no intent to deceive or obstruct.
But luckily for TWA pilots, one laptop was missed during the data deletion process.
Carl
But luckily for TWA pilots, one laptop was missed during the data deletion process.
Carl
IRENAS, Senior District Judge:
Before this Court is the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions, yet another skirmish in an eight year legal war. For the reasons set forth below, this Motion will be denied.An opinion disposing of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in the same case will be filed simultaneously and reference is made thereto for the factual and legal background of this law suit.Plaintiffs, former TWA pilots, have for the life of this litigation been seeking the so-called “smoking gun” which would prove concretely, that the Air Line Pilots Association’s (“ALPA”) breached its duty of fair representation. This duty was owed to the Plaintiffs by ALPA because the union was the pilots’ exclusive representative during the TWA, Inc.-American Airlines assets acquisition. Plaintiffs contend the reason for the lack of the so-called smoking gun is ALPA’s spoliation of evidence. However, without specific evidence of fraud or bad faith, these allegations do not rise to the standard required for a finding of spoliation...
...Plaintiffs assert that ALPA intentionally or recklessly
destroyed documents, emails and other communication well into the discovery period for this lawsuit...Plaintiffs have failed to establish any evidence of bad faith, have failed to identify even one document or email favorable to their case that was lost or destroyed, and they have failed to specify any prejudice to their case “arising from the alleged oversights of which they accuse ALPA.” ...
...In other words, there must be a finding that the spoliation was intentional and that there was fraud and a desire to suppress the truth before the Court will make a finding of spoliation...
...The destruction of the boxes appears to have been accidental, and Plaintiffs have provided only speculation to prove the contrary. Plaintiffs rely on speculation with regards to email deletion. For example, 269 boxes of documents from ALPA’s TWA field office were destroyed by Iron Mountain, a document management and storage company used by ALPA. Plaintiffs claim these boxes, which were all allegedly relevant, were intentionally destroyed. However, as stated in a letter from Iron Mountain, the boxes were inadvertently destroyed. ..
...Furthermore, Plaintiffs use vague statements, such as: “ALPA’s spoliation was so widespread and covered such a long period of time it can only be concluded that substantial evidence was destroyed which would have been favorable to Plaintiffs.” Pl. Reply Motion for Sanctions, 17. Such a catch-all statement, along with vague speculation as to whether evidence has been destroyed or even whether evidence was relevant does not rise to the specificity level required by the Third Circuit to impose sanctions or even make a finding of spoliation...
via eLesson
Before this Court is the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions, yet another skirmish in an eight year legal war. For the reasons set forth below, this Motion will be denied.An opinion disposing of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in the same case will be filed simultaneously and reference is made thereto for the factual and legal background of this law suit.Plaintiffs, former TWA pilots, have for the life of this litigation been seeking the so-called “smoking gun” which would prove concretely, that the Air Line Pilots Association’s (“ALPA”) breached its duty of fair representation. This duty was owed to the Plaintiffs by ALPA because the union was the pilots’ exclusive representative during the TWA, Inc.-American Airlines assets acquisition. Plaintiffs contend the reason for the lack of the so-called smoking gun is ALPA’s spoliation of evidence. However, without specific evidence of fraud or bad faith, these allegations do not rise to the standard required for a finding of spoliation...
...Plaintiffs assert that ALPA intentionally or recklessly
destroyed documents, emails and other communication well into the discovery period for this lawsuit...Plaintiffs have failed to establish any evidence of bad faith, have failed to identify even one document or email favorable to their case that was lost or destroyed, and they have failed to specify any prejudice to their case “arising from the alleged oversights of which they accuse ALPA.” ...
...In other words, there must be a finding that the spoliation was intentional and that there was fraud and a desire to suppress the truth before the Court will make a finding of spoliation...
...The destruction of the boxes appears to have been accidental, and Plaintiffs have provided only speculation to prove the contrary. Plaintiffs rely on speculation with regards to email deletion. For example, 269 boxes of documents from ALPA’s TWA field office were destroyed by Iron Mountain, a document management and storage company used by ALPA. Plaintiffs claim these boxes, which were all allegedly relevant, were intentionally destroyed. However, as stated in a letter from Iron Mountain, the boxes were inadvertently destroyed. ..
...Furthermore, Plaintiffs use vague statements, such as: “ALPA’s spoliation was so widespread and covered such a long period of time it can only be concluded that substantial evidence was destroyed which would have been favorable to Plaintiffs.” Pl. Reply Motion for Sanctions, 17. Such a catch-all statement, along with vague speculation as to whether evidence has been destroyed or even whether evidence was relevant does not rise to the specificity level required by the Third Circuit to impose sanctions or even make a finding of spoliation...
12-15-2013 | 03:36 PM
#8959
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Really? The judge issued his opinion that there was no proof that evidence was intentionally destroyed 2009 court order. It is true that the plaintiffs argued that ALPA destroyed information purposely but they failed to prove to the court and when they asked the court for sanctions, which the judge denied because there was no proof of the allegation.
IRENAS, Senior District Judge:
Before this Court is the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions, yet another skirmish in an eight year legal war. For the reasons set forth below, this Motion will be denied.An opinion disposing of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in the same case will be filed simultaneously and reference is made thereto for the factual and legal background of this law suit.Plaintiffs, former TWA pilots, have for the life of this litigation been seeking the so-called “smoking gun” which would prove concretely, that the Air Line Pilots Association’s (“ALPA”) breached its duty of fair representation. This duty was owed to the Plaintiffs by ALPA because the union was the pilots’ exclusive representative during the TWA, Inc.-American Airlines assets acquisition. Plaintiffs contend the reason for the lack of the so-called smoking gun is ALPA’s spoliation of evidence. However, without specific evidence of fraud or bad faith, these allegations do not rise to the standard required for a finding of spoliation...
...Plaintiffs assert that ALPA intentionally or recklessly
destroyed documents, emails and other communication well into the discovery period for this lawsuit...Plaintiffs have failed to establish any evidence of bad faith, have failed to identify even one document or email favorable to their case that was lost or destroyed, and they have failed to specify any prejudice to their case “arising from the alleged oversights of which they accuse ALPA.” ...
...In other words, there must be a finding that the spoliation was intentional and that there was fraud and a desire to suppress the truth before the Court will make a finding of spoliation...
...The destruction of the boxes appears to have been accidental, and Plaintiffs have provided only speculation to prove the contrary. Plaintiffs rely on speculation with regards to email deletion. For example, 269 boxes of documents from ALPA’s TWA field office were destroyed by Iron Mountain, a document management and storage company used by ALPA. Plaintiffs claim these boxes, which were all allegedly relevant, were intentionally destroyed. However, as stated in a letter from Iron Mountain, the boxes were inadvertently destroyed. ..
...Furthermore, Plaintiffs use vague statements, such as: “ALPA’s spoliation was so widespread and covered such a long period of time it can only be concluded that substantial evidence was destroyed which would have been favorable to Plaintiffs.” Pl. Reply Motion for Sanctions, 17. Such a catch-all statement, along with vague speculation as to whether evidence has been destroyed or even whether evidence was relevant does not rise to the specificity level required by the Third Circuit to impose sanctions or even make a finding of spoliation...
via eLessonBefore this Court is the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions, yet another skirmish in an eight year legal war. For the reasons set forth below, this Motion will be denied.An opinion disposing of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in the same case will be filed simultaneously and reference is made thereto for the factual and legal background of this law suit.Plaintiffs, former TWA pilots, have for the life of this litigation been seeking the so-called “smoking gun” which would prove concretely, that the Air Line Pilots Association’s (“ALPA”) breached its duty of fair representation. This duty was owed to the Plaintiffs by ALPA because the union was the pilots’ exclusive representative during the TWA, Inc.-American Airlines assets acquisition. Plaintiffs contend the reason for the lack of the so-called smoking gun is ALPA’s spoliation of evidence. However, without specific evidence of fraud or bad faith, these allegations do not rise to the standard required for a finding of spoliation...
...Plaintiffs assert that ALPA intentionally or recklessly
destroyed documents, emails and other communication well into the discovery period for this lawsuit...Plaintiffs have failed to establish any evidence of bad faith, have failed to identify even one document or email favorable to their case that was lost or destroyed, and they have failed to specify any prejudice to their case “arising from the alleged oversights of which they accuse ALPA.” ...
...In other words, there must be a finding that the spoliation was intentional and that there was fraud and a desire to suppress the truth before the Court will make a finding of spoliation...
...The destruction of the boxes appears to have been accidental, and Plaintiffs have provided only speculation to prove the contrary. Plaintiffs rely on speculation with regards to email deletion. For example, 269 boxes of documents from ALPA’s TWA field office were destroyed by Iron Mountain, a document management and storage company used by ALPA. Plaintiffs claim these boxes, which were all allegedly relevant, were intentionally destroyed. However, as stated in a letter from Iron Mountain, the boxes were inadvertently destroyed. ..
...Furthermore, Plaintiffs use vague statements, such as: “ALPA’s spoliation was so widespread and covered such a long period of time it can only be concluded that substantial evidence was destroyed which would have been favorable to Plaintiffs.” Pl. Reply Motion for Sanctions, 17. Such a catch-all statement, along with vague speculation as to whether evidence has been destroyed or even whether evidence was relevant does not rise to the specificity level required by the Third Circuit to impose sanctions or even make a finding of spoliation...
Did you not even read my post? Here it is again with relevant portions bolded:
Yes, it is true. During testimony when ALPA people were asked why they destroyed material evidence, they stated it was done during the normal course of deleting emails and other data. ALPA claimed they couldn't be held liable because they didn't know it was wrong for them to do so...therefore there was no intent to deceive or obstruct.
But luckily for TWA pilots, one laptop was missed during the data deletion process.
But luckily for TWA pilots, one laptop was missed during the data deletion process.
There is no question ALPA destroyed a lot of documents related to their representation actions of TWA pilots. Everyone knows that...including the jury. The judge just didn't think those actions met the legal threshold to mandate sanctions against ALPA for those actions.
Carl
12-15-2013 | 04:52 PM
#8960
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat 744
For ALPA LOVERS Answer this
Why is DAL still on a "B Scale"? Honest question guys. Got a GS for Sat morning for a 2 day trip. Capt was a line holder for DEC, I'm on resv. He gets 10:30 credit, I get 9:06 (if line holder, 10:30 credit for the F/O). Now, I really do believe that a majority of DAL pilots wanted that removed in the last contract (equal pay for equal trips) which was one of the questions on the so called "survey". But for some reason, a clause is in the contract allowing a flow -up for rj driver is in our contract, but not equal pay for trips for DELTA PILOTS!
Someone please explain this..... rj drivers are more important that equal pay for DAL pilots?!!
Someone please explain this..... rj drivers are more important that equal pay for DAL pilots?!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 10:33 AM
