Originally Posted by oldmako (Post 1663123)

Because he was a spineless idiot?

Originally Posted by Nothere (Post 1663135)

There is absolutely no evidence that the current MEC has done anything to favor LUAL pilots over LCAL pilots. You know this but I guess it works to drive the nitwits that believe everything you tell them without question.

The fact that the LUAL pilots are the majority and will likely be the majority for some time and have a majority of pilots at the most domiciles drives the members on the MEC. What would you have us do, turn over the MEC to the minority and see how it works out. I don't think so considering your actions in the early phases of the merger.

Now, if you can come up with any evidence that the LCAL pilots are being slighted to favor the LUAL pilot please post it and quit fanning the fire with lies, rumors and innuendoes.

Originally Posted by APC225 (Post 1663124)

The LCAL union seemed to be particularly vulnerable to getting the bad end of the deal and "LUAL pilots are in complete control of our union now so it will be interesting to see if there's a different result" not regarding the decision, but possibly negotiating a remedy with the company if given that lattitude.

Originally Posted by APC225 (Post 1663207)

DRC DEADLOCK ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS UAL/CAL EKN AWARD DISPUTE RESOLUTION COMMITTEE UAL Claim No. 1

AWARD

1) The Company did not violate the EKN Award when it failed to cancel training assignments to fill both CAL and UAL vacancies that were scheduled to commence after September 6, 2013--and rebid them using the ISL.

2) The Company did not fail to fulfill any obligation the Conditions and Restrictions imposed upon it when it complied with a Memorandum of Understanding it entered into with both MECs by honoring pilots' September, October and November 2013 Training Assignment Bids, which it had awarded prior to the Arbitration Board's decision.

3) UAL DRC Claim No. 1 is denied.

Originally Posted by APC225 (Post 1663207)

DRC DEADLOCK ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS UAL/CAL EKN AWARD DISPUTE RESOLUTION COMMITTEE UAL Claim No. 1

AWARD

1) The Company did not violate the EKN Award when it failed to cancel training assignments to fill both CAL and UAL vacancies that were scheduled to commence after September 6, 2013--and rebid them using the ISL.

2) The Company did not fail to fulfill any obligation the Conditions and Restrictions imposed upon it when it complied with a Memorandum of Understanding it entered into with both MECs by honoring pilots' September, October and November 2013 Training Assignment Bids, which it had awarded prior to the Arbitration Board's decision.

3) UAL DRC Claim No. 1 is denied.

Originally Posted by jsled (Post 1663497)

This award is just, and LUAL will lose claim #2 as well (displacements), because:

1. UAL ALPA signed the SFO MOU. It allows continued training AND displacements for ALL cancelled bids (not just SFO bids).

2. As LCAL successfully argued, although the SFO MOU may appear to trumped by the SLI OPINION, it does not violate the SLI AWARD.

Originally Posted by A320 (Post 1663404)

Exactly how many LCAL pilots continued training in this scenario?