Ward Vs. United
I got this letter today about a class action lawsuit on behalf of pilots and flight attendants based in California between 2015 to present. This sounds like something that should be coming from ALPA legal and not an external law firm. I thought we were not supposed to litigate against United without using the grievance process for these types of issues. Thoughts?
|
Originally Posted by texaspropguy
(Post 3233357)
I got this letter today about a class action lawsuit on behalf of pilots and flight attendants based in California between 2015 to present. This sounds like something that should be coming from ALPA legal and not an external law firm. I thought we were not supposed to litigate against United without using the grievance process for these types of issues. Thoughts?
|
Don’t see it winning. I believe it will be ruled preemption of Ca state law since we are governed by the RLA and paid per the UPA provisions. My 2 cents.
|
Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG
(Post 3233415)
Don’t see it winning. I believe it will be ruled preemption of Ca state law since we are governed by the RLA and paid per the UPA provisions. My 2 cents.
|
If Ward v United Airlines is this case, then it's already settled law by the California Supreme Court last year.
|
Originally Posted by libertyrisk
(Post 3233449)
If Ward v United Airlines is this case, then it's already settled law by the California Supreme Court last year.
I like this Ward guy. Complying with regs is expensive and I don't like to be the only guy obeying law. Hold'em too it! If I ever get a payout I'll put the proceeds towards a building permit for my shed. Pay it forward. |
This would sure shake up the seniority of the CA bases if all of a sudden reserves were making guarantee plus LPV.
|
I flew with Capt Ward multiple times before he retired. Sharp guy and a good union volunteer. I have no idea if the suit has any chance, but he deserves the benefit of the doubt from his former fellow pilots.
|
if the state of California would benefit, then the suit may likely move forward...Think about it. Increased earnings means increased taxes. If the state believes that the state was denied revenue by some sort of "scheme" by an employer, than the state may also join the suit. It could get rather complicated....
|
Originally Posted by Oletimer
(Post 3233970)
if the state of California would benefit, then the suit may likely move forward...Think about it. Increased earnings means increased taxes. If the state believes that the state was denied revenue by some sort of "scheme" by an employer, than the state may also join the suit. It could get rather complicated....
#what_is_wrong_with_California |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:14 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands