R57 relay

Then why was the question that Silver distilled for you "Did USAPA fail it's DFR for not including the Nicolau award into the MOU?" If it's done, why didn't she rule? Why the hearing?

cactiboss

Lol, I just posted a judge ruling written in black and white to which your reply is that in doesn't really say what it says. Delusional.

Have you not been on here claiming the MOU does away with the Nic as our list? Now go read the ruling again.


"11 During the vote on the MOU, USAPA repeatedly assured all its members that the vote
12 would have no bearing on adoption of the Nicolau Award. "

What does no "bearing" mean to a repressed brain?

R57 relay

Read this, slowly, you posted it.

“no East
13 pilot should vote against the MOU because they fear that ratifying the MOU will implement
14 the Nicolau Award, and no West pilot should vote for the MOU because they believe the
15 MOU will implement the Nicolau Award.”

They told you this and you voted for it anyway. That seems to counter Judge Silver's claim. Hasn't she had both sides scratching their heads before, like when she said that she told to negotiate when she never did?

The MOU didn't having any affect on adoption of the Nic. It wasn't USAPA's intention to adopt it before, it wasn't their intention after.

The MOU is clear. You guys sued to change it after you voted for it. You may prevail and have the Nic used, but hasn't the Judge told you she couldn't force it?

cactiboss

OMG! You are as dense as thought you were. You actually just made the wests case.

R57 relay

Really? From quoting a quote from a judge on a webboard? Wow! I'm so influential.

You were told it didn't implement the Nic. You voted for it anyway.

I just read the whole complaint. What you quoted simply has to do with class status, not validity of the complaint. She has always seemed sympathetic to the west cause, yet the one standing order we have is her's in favor of USAPA.

Have you ever heard "please, please don't throw me in the briar patch!"?

Wiskey Driver

The TA said binding arbitration and so long as the company was not out significant money they would abide by the arbitration results as well. The Award said ONCE A NEW JOINT CONTRACT IS IN PLACE AWARD GOES INTO EFFECT. Now I know you dont like it but the MOU constitutes a new joint contract. Why you ask? Because it substantially changes LOA93 and Contract 04 from scope thru compensation and scheduling.

The fact that usapa said its not this or that is completely immaterial. The DOJ right now is the only thing keeping usapa from choking to death because the noose is already in place and they are standing on the chair. I will rejoice once its kicked out from under them.

WD at AWA

cactusmike

R 57 - you are right, this is just procedural stuff. The whole key to this case rests on ripeness. We won the DFR but lost on the ripeness, or, more correctly, we had our case held in abeyance until it was ripe.

But look at the language she uses in her order. She has run out of patience with USAPA and their end run around her to the Ninth is not going to impress her. To say she is sympathetic to the West is a misnomer. Judge Silver, along with Judge Wake have ruled in favor of the West because our legal arguments are sound. It's not sympathy, it's ruling on the merits. That's all I expect from a judge.

USAPA has thrown a lot of crap against the wall, trying to make it stick. Fortunately, the judge is sharp and has been able to zero in on the facts. I don't do predictions anymore, I will just let the case proceed and we will see what the outcome is. I do think we won't get a ruling if she feels the merger is dead.

R57 relay

That's not quite right Mike. You won the DFR in (I believe) district court, but it was overturned on appeal because of ripeness. The merits were never heard, so we don't know what would happen there. I've always said that I thought you had a good case on the original DFR if it became ripe, but we don't KNOW what would happen on an appeal on merits.

You should know by now not to put too much into Judge Silver's words. How many of you guys said that she "had" to rule a certain way in the company's DJ, only to end up surprised. It's not over until we have an order and then the appeals run their course, for either side.

I'm sure she is not happy with USAPA. They are questioning her and who likes that? Thing is, with the language from 9th, they really have to.

R57 relay

Why would I be unhappy with the MOU replacing the TA. I completely agree with you on that. The thing is, the MOU stipulates changes to the TA on seniority, just like it did for min. fleet, scope, etc. You guys read it, you voted for it, then you want to claim it is illegal. I don't get how that works, but concede that it might.

You've thought that noose was firmly in place before.

crzipilot

I think you guys are reading into her text a little much. She said that USAPA's arguments that the West by voting yes on the MOU indicated that they didn't want the NIC is absurd. (or something like that)

No Where did she say. The NIC IS THE LIST. She simply said that by voting on the MOU does not mean that you guys don't want the NIC.
Sure you guys WANT the NIC, and she's going to listen and see if that happens.

BUT she isn't saying that the NIC is it. IN fact at the last little thing in her court room. She CLEARLY told your lawyer.

"THE NIC DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THE SENIORITY LIST"

But I guess we are crazy and you have forgotten that comment?!