Wait a second...I just pointed how your attempt at trying to make a point was erroneous and somehow you're a class act??

No wonder you think Furlough=robust career

If we see no lawsuits and attempt to decertify ALPA after the award then I will feel bad, but something tells me that some UAL pilots are already getting the lawyers salivating at the upcoming litigation...

 

So because we do not agree, and you lose the argument (pay banding) then unity is destroyed?? I see, as long as we do as you want then you are on board. That is not unity.

 

BINGO! At least some of the CAL bubba's "get it"

I am a ZIT....."get it"

Stay Classy KILDER!

 

There is always a chance for a lawsuit but it does not necessarily mean they will prevail. If I were to worry at ALPA National, I'd worry about being decertified on UAL's property after the smoke clears on this merger. There is a lot of angst about the way ALPA has handled this merger and the fact the Regional's, who have different needs and desires than the Major's, out number us and therefore tend to push ALPA in directions that is counter to OUR needs

 

The lawyers are working on a contingency and will no doubt make a lot of money, but the subject was will the pilots be better off for having filed a lawsuit. The answer is clearly yes. It may have taken years, but the TWA pilots prevailed and are presently calculating damages. They will be made whole by ALPA for not being fairly represented, and at some point in the future, ALPA will realize that when they won the right to represnt a pilot group, they have the obligation to represent all of them equally.

 

Will it change the American seniority list? No.
Will the TWA pilots be made whole?.....doubt it. I'm guessing they will be lucky to see 10 cents on the dollar by the time it reaches their hands.

My whole point is rarely if ever does a lawsuit change a federally arbitrated, "agreed to" binding agreement. While many will point to USAirways as an example of proving this wrong, that simply isn't true. The hold up is one side refuses to negotiate so the list will not see the light of day. The SLI will follow the USAirways pilots, even into the merger with AA. There will not be a do over because one side disagrees.

 

Sleeves,

The unity issue is framed by many instances, not just the idiotic pay banding compromise.

Don't forget about the training debacle when the CAL MEC decided to thumb their noses at us when our training and procedures underwent wholesale and idiotic changes nearly by fiat Opportunity lost, division created.

Don't forget about the chance to put the screws to the company during the profit sharing debacle. Opportunity lost, and division created.

Don't forget about the numerous times during JCBA negotiations JPOS agreed to agree with the UAL MEC and then instantly changed his tune the minute they were in front of the company negotiators or the times when our moves were telegraphed to the company ahead of time.

Don't forget about Ben's letter and now Oscars "press to test" on the other forum.

Don't forget about LUAL MIGS now flying for CAL getting tossed out of a union meeting.

I'm sure that there are more, these are just the ones that pop into my head. Perhaps some others will add to the list.

And your SLI proposal, which puts guys with 15-16 years of longevity behind your recent hires is simply idiotic and not worth comment. Basically to us its an extended middle finger and seniority grab.

 

The TWA pilots have not gotten a penny and they can't even come up with a coherent theory of damages. This is 12 years after the integration and they still can't figure it out. They have only temporarily won a verdict that says at least one pilot was damaged by one dollar. Wait until they hear the testimony that American was going to shut them down if they did not change their scope clause. What are their damages then?

Some jury also awarded a lady $20 million for spilling coffee but she never got that money. It's not over until it's over.

 

Liebeck v. McDonalds

No. You're off by 17.3M. She was awarded 2.7 million but that is not the whole story. McDonalds had an opportunity to settle, but chose to litigate. They lost in large part because they were such tools during the lead up to the trial. The jury went nuts with the punitive award because they were sick of what McDonals had done.

Like most fascinating headlines, you only get about one percent of the whole story. The WSJ wrote an excellent piece which detailed the case if you care to read it. If not, here's the Cliff Notes version. WIKI doesn't to the whole story justice.

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I thought we put an end to this with the JCBA...