Phoenix court hears US Air seniority case
10-03-2012, 06:46 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
We all knew that DP would appeal the outcome of Jdg. Silvers ruling, regardless. It buys him time..
Both the 9th and now Silver have both agreed that seniority is a UNION matter. The fact is that a joint CBA, Nic non-inclusive, DOES NOT necessarily constitute a DFR. The union has a "Broad Margin" to negotiate in good faith. The final product might in fact benefit the west!!
Both the 9th and now Silver have both agreed that seniority is a UNION matter. The fact is that a joint CBA, Nic non-inclusive, DOES NOT necessarily constitute a DFR. The union has a "Broad Margin" to negotiate in good faith. The final product might in fact benefit the west!!
10-03-2012, 06:49 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
Originally Posted by cactiboss
No the west is not ready to move on. We have fleet mins and the Nic. Is still the list in our contract. Do you think we want to be stapled and then go merge with that list? Or do we stay separate and wait for a merge where we either get the Nic. Or a 3 way?
10-03-2012, 07:05 AM
#33
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by LittleBoyBlew
Oh so NOW the nic is "still the list in our contract". Who's contract? And if so, why aren't you boys bidding the 330 yet?
10-03-2012, 07:59 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
Originally Posted by cactiboss
If the Nic is not in our contracts as modified by the TA why is usapa trying to replace it with a different list?
10-03-2012, 08:02 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 139
While we're arguing about this, Delta is talking about this:
I say we just do it again under the McCaskill-Bond. Then it's law. The Nic predated the McCaskill-Bond, so the government will never have the balls to step in.
I say we just do it again under the McCaskill-Bond. Then it's law. The Nic predated the McCaskill-Bond, so the government will never have the balls to step in.
10-03-2012, 08:15 AM
#36
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by MayDaze
I say we just do it again under the McCaskill-Bond. Then it's law. The Nic predated the McCaskill-Bond, so the government will never have the balls to step in.
10-03-2012, 08:24 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 139
Originally Posted by cactiboss
M/B specifically prohibits it's application to prior mergers.
10-03-2012, 08:25 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
Originally Posted by cactiboss
M/B specifically prohibits it's application to prior mergers.
If we remain stand alone, a CBA encompassing the Nic is NON RATIFIABLE!!
10-03-2012, 08:29 AM
#39
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Originally Posted by MayDaze
I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure our pilot group hasn't merged yet. Let's get creative, I'm sure a lawyer could bend it a bit. I've read the whole M/B and I don't remember anything we couldn't work around.
10-03-2012, 08:36 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
Originally Posted by cactiboss
Everything is complete except for a single cba. So there aren't any misunderstandings, we will sue anyone that touches the Nic. And as the company's attorney Siegal said, we will probably win. You boys forget the company does not have to accept any of usapa's seniority proposals that aren't the Nic. (the Nic. has been accepted and placed in our cba by management)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
