IBT National overrules Local 357's NC
#123
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Neither JT, SG or anyone else personally benefited from the transaction more than any other Frontier pilot. No "slice of the pie."
Moffatt continues to insinuate that there "may be" criminal charges. There won't be.
Moffatt states, "There's a lot of NDA's involving the sale of Frontier, but I've seen the books and there's no one that will buy them. You know the saying, 'How do you become a Millionaire in aviation, you start with a billion." Although he butchered the phrase miserably...
I doubt that Moffatt has seen Frontier's books, as he claims, but if he did and he is covered by a NDA, he certainly violated the NDA by pontificating on the viability of the Frontier business model and possible sale.
Last edited by IA1125; 03-13-2013 at 05:16 PM.
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
FAPA isn’t attempting to take a benefit from Frontier pilots, the IBT is.
IBT acknowledges that the case is NOT in the best interest of the Frontier pilots, that Frontier pilots have no interest in pursuing the suit, AND they state, on the record, they don’t care.
The majority of the court documents are currently available on the FAPA website, and additional documents are posted as they become publicly available.
Do you personally monitor the lawsuit’s documents as they become available or wait to have it handed to you? You have heard of Google, right? Try googling what 3662 posted, “Case 1:11-cv-02007-MSK-KLM.”
FAPA doesn’t claim that the lawsuit is a “game changer” as it relates to Section six negotiations, Local 357 and CM maintains to their “native” membership that it is. I have no idea WHY they feel it will make a difference.
What part of which TA do you believe was changed after member ratification?
And, yes Local 357 has a weekly conference call. Would you rather have a weekly FAPA conference call that blows sunshine up... inside you and provides inaccurate information or no conference call?
Many of the 357 members don't even bother with the call anymore, they consider it a complete waste of time (rightly so IMO).
Last edited by IA1125; 03-13-2013 at 05:12 PM.
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
The magistrate judge is following civil procedure rules and allowing deposition of a properly prepared IBT witness. Unfortunately, there is almost nothing relevant to the defense that can be garnered from deposition of the new witness. The magistrate says as much in her ruling.
You might benefit greatly from replacing your entire NC as well.
I predict a summary judgement in favor of the plaintiffs. Clearing up this procedural abnormality with the IBT witness prevents an appeal unless a new germane set of facts is revealed (and still unlikely there). If you've read the docket, you'd be hard pressed to see any other outcome. Had RAH/FAPAInvest not continued in their juvenile arrogant fashion, illegally dealing after the election, and had BB not written to Jeff and Scott saying "LOA/Commercial Agreement" "To keep it out of the IBT's hands", they might have a defense. However, those emails and the wire transfer, clearly establish the illegal activity.
I’ve read the docket and many other briefings, motions and rulings through the years. Depending on the outcome you want, you can find parts that support your preconceived conclusion in any of these documents.
You can also read one party’s brief and think, “How could anyone argue against that." Then you read the next, opposing, brief and think the same thing. I think I’ll wait for the Judge to rule.
After all the IBT rhetoric, is anyone at the IBT willing to admit that LOA 67 was drafted, put out to the FAPA represented Frontier pilot membership and overwhelmingly ratified by the Frontier pilots prior to the hostile takeover by the IBT and is therefore a valid LOA?
#126
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
If their information is accurate, the information should be considered.
I believe the gist of 3662's post is, Moffatt is either out of the loop or untruthful - which is it? And is the fate of the native RAH pilot in the hands of National or Local 357?
They seem like reasonable questions and, if I were a native RAH'er, I'd want an answer. I'm not even a native and I'd like to hear the answer...
#127
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 928
Likes: 2
Also, how is it possible to "defame" the made-up user name of some anonymous agitator with a clearly demonstrated a lack of credibility?
If you knew even a portion of what you pretend, you'd already understand the the vast majority of legal processes are lawyers arguing that other lawyers are wrong. This happens all of the time.
#128
How is making a few accurate observations about the demeanor and nature of the posts of some Frontier pilots considered "defamation?"
Also, how is it possible to "defame" the made-up user name of some anonymous agitator with a clearly demonstrated a lack of credibility?
If you knew even a portion of what you pretend, you'd already understand the the vast majority of legal processes are lawyers arguing that other lawyers are wrong. This happens all of the time.
Also, how is it possible to "defame" the made-up user name of some anonymous agitator with a clearly demonstrated a lack of credibility?
If you knew even a portion of what you pretend, you'd already understand the the vast majority of legal processes are lawyers arguing that other lawyers are wrong. This happens all of the time.
I do understand that lawyers argue with lawyers. Yes this is how the process works, and again you avoided the facts. All I was doing was paraphrasing one sentence in the 11 page document. And you point out lawyers argue with lawyers(really). Forget substance sqwkvfr, go for the low hanging fruit.
One more time, the point 3662 was trying to understand is why you all let CM lie to you. Please keep pointing out the irrelevant and let the facts pass you by.
#129
New Hire
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: Airbus Captain
FAPA isn’t your legal representative organization, The IBT is.
FAPA isn’t attempting to take a benefit from Frontier pilots, the IBT is.
IBT acknowledges that the case is NOT in the best interest of the Frontier pilots, that Frontier pilots have no interest in pursuing the suit, AND they state, on the record, they don’t care.
The majority of the court documents are currently available on the FAPA website, and additional documents are posted as they become publicly available.
Do you personally monitor the lawsuit’s documents as they become available or wait to have it handed to you? You have heard of Google, right? Try googling what 3662 posted, “Case 1:11-cv-02007-MSK-KLM.”
FAPA doesn’t claim that the lawsuit is a “game changer” as it relates to Section six negotiations, Local 357 and CM maintains to their “native” membership that it is. I have no idea WHY they feel it will make a difference.
What part of which TA do you believe was changed after member ratification?
And, yes Local 357 has a weekly conference call. Would you rather have a weekly FAPA conference call that blows sunshine up... inside you and provides inaccurate information or no conference call?
Many of the 357 members don't even bother with the call anymore, they consider it a complete waste of time (rightly so IMO).
FAPA isn’t attempting to take a benefit from Frontier pilots, the IBT is.
IBT acknowledges that the case is NOT in the best interest of the Frontier pilots, that Frontier pilots have no interest in pursuing the suit, AND they state, on the record, they don’t care.
The majority of the court documents are currently available on the FAPA website, and additional documents are posted as they become publicly available.
Do you personally monitor the lawsuit’s documents as they become available or wait to have it handed to you? You have heard of Google, right? Try googling what 3662 posted, “Case 1:11-cv-02007-MSK-KLM.”
FAPA doesn’t claim that the lawsuit is a “game changer” as it relates to Section six negotiations, Local 357 and CM maintains to their “native” membership that it is. I have no idea WHY they feel it will make a difference.
What part of which TA do you believe was changed after member ratification?
And, yes Local 357 has a weekly conference call. Would you rather have a weekly FAPA conference call that blows sunshine up... inside you and provides inaccurate information or no conference call?
Many of the 357 members don't even bother with the call anymore, they consider it a complete waste of time (rightly so IMO).
Please tell me what you guys are doing. You can't make phone call, send an email or file a grievance on our behalf. Could you at least provide information to the pilot group in regards to the lawsuit against LOA 67? Or would you rather just lambaste the membership (once again) in a public forum?
How many pilots have paid dues? It appears to me not many.
And yes, the "Restructuring TA" as we voted on doesn't exist anymore. All of the "meat and potatoes" have been removed, placed in a commercial agreement (which I have not seen). Who knows what is in the commercial agreement now. Do we still have an equity stake? Will we see profit sharing? All very doubtful at this point!
#130
So we are supposed to pay $500 to FAPA for what? So some past or present BOD member can tell me to go look for it myself?
Please tell me what you guys are doing. You can't make phone call, send an email or file a grievance on our behalf. Could you at least provide information to the pilot group in regards to the lawsuit against LOA 67? Or would you rather just lambaste the membership (once again) in a public forum?
How many pilots have paid dues? It appears to me not many.
And yes, the "Restructuring TA" as we voted on doesn't exist anymore. All of the "meat and potatoes" have been removed, placed in a commercial agreement (which I have not seen). Who knows what is in the commercial agreement now. Do we still have an equity stake? Will we see profit sharing? All very doubtful at this point!
Please tell me what you guys are doing. You can't make phone call, send an email or file a grievance on our behalf. Could you at least provide information to the pilot group in regards to the lawsuit against LOA 67? Or would you rather just lambaste the membership (once again) in a public forum?
How many pilots have paid dues? It appears to me not many.
And yes, the "Restructuring TA" as we voted on doesn't exist anymore. All of the "meat and potatoes" have been removed, placed in a commercial agreement (which I have not seen). Who knows what is in the commercial agreement now. Do we still have an equity stake? Will we see profit sharing? All very doubtful at this point!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



