flybywire44

I didn't say anyone did anything wrong, I just said that East and West did this to themselves.

Don't incorporate me into your East/West BS葉his fight has nothing to do with me. I just pop my head in from time to time to refresh the repetitive tail chasing you folks do in this thread.

USAPA does not seem to actually be fighting a case here葉hey're just stalling. The end game is what matters most.

crzipilot

And it's easy to see, that Mr. Harper consulted to the West that this MOU could be argued as a JCBA. Strangely he seems to be taking a page out of the Seeham Book. But alas, the MOU can not be construed as a JCBA or otherwise you guys would have been on our last Permanent Bid for Nov.

In addition, this whole MOU is contigent on the merger.....and if it it doesn't happen, then the MOU doesn't happen.....so There is no reason to hear the case, So in essence YOU are making USAPA's case on whether or not the hearing should go on. Sounds like a great reason for an appeal.

If she has the hearing while the DOJ stuff is still going on, and she rules on it before the DOJ rules........then how is it that she rules on something that is hypothetical??? I think she runs right back into the problem Wake had, when the 9th told him to stop using his crystal ball and wait until all the eggs hatched, THEN you can see if you have a DFR.. Harper keeps blowing his powder a little early. I wonder if he has that problem elsewhere?!?!?

Wiskey Driver

Ok you lost me on the changes to seniority? I just don't follow where you are coming from on that.

What we voted for was a better contract, what we DID NOT vote for was this agreement to drop our insistence on using that arbitration award. I think that is the issue you are having issues with.

Now as for the noose wrapped around usapa throat, it seems as if they are some sort of feline with 9 lives. I have to think that the court will at some juncture say "you entered into this arbitration knowing full well the possibilities of not getting what you wanted".

WD at AWA

R57 relay

I'm coming from the actual document you voted for, the MOU.

Here ya go:

"h. US Airways agrees that neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for
changing the seniority lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the process set forth in
this Paragraph 10."

Then here you have paragraph 10. Notice that nowhere in it does it say anything about keeping the Nic, and the above paragraph says that it is the only way we will change the lists currently in effect. The Nicolau is not in effect.


"10. a. A seniority integration process consistent with McCaskill-Bond shall begin as soon as possible
after the Effective Date. If, on the date ninety (90) days following the Effective Date, direct
negotiations have failed to result in a merged seniority list acceptable to the pilots at both airlines, a
panel of three neutral arbitrators will be designated within fifteen (15) days to resolve the dispute,
pursuant to the authority and requirements of McCaskill-Bond. That arbitration proceeding will
commence no later than 60 days after the designation of the arbitrators, or as soon thereafter as
practicable given the availability of the designated arbitrators, provided that it is understood that, in no
event, shall the seniority integration arbitration proceeding commence prior to final approval of the
JCBA pursuant to the deadlines and procedures in Paragraph 27 below. The panel of arbitrators will
render its award within six (6) months of the commencement of the arbitration, and in any event not
later than 24 months after the Effective Date.
b. The panel of arbitrators may not render an award unless it complies with all of the following
criteria: (i) the list does not require any active pilot to displace any other active pilot from the latter's
position; (ii) furloughed pilots may not bump/displace active pilots; (iii) except as set forth in
Paragraphs 12 and 13 below, the list does not require that pilots be compensated for flying not
performed (e.g., differential pay for a position not actually flown); (iv) the list allows pilots who, at the
time of implementation of an integrated seniority list, are in the process of completing or who have
completed initial qualification training for a new category (e.g., A320 Captain or 757 First Officer), or
who have successfully bid such a position but have not been trained because of conditions beyond
their control (such as a company freeze), to be assigned to the positions for which they have been
trained or successfully bid, regardless of their relative standing on the integrated seniority list; and (v)
it does not contain conditions and restrictions that materially increase costs associated with training or
company paid move as specified in the JCBA.
7
c. The integrated seniority list resulting from the McCaskill-Bond process shall be final and
binding on APA and USAPA (and/or the certified bargaining representative of the combined pilot
group), the company(ies) and its(their) successors (if any), and all of the pilots of American/New
American Airlines and US Airways.
d. During the McCaskill-Bond process, including any arbitration proceeding, US Airways,
American or New American Airlines, or their successors (if any), shall remain neutral regarding the
order in which pilots are placed on the integrated seniority list, but such neutrality shall not prevent
said carriers from insuring that the award complies with the criteria in Paragraph 10(b)(i)-(v).
e. The obligations contained in this Paragraph shall be specifically enforceable on an
expedited basis before a System Board of Adjustment in accordance with Paragraph 20, provided that
the obligations imposed by McCaskill-Bond may be enforced in a court of competent jurisdiction.
f. A Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") consistent with
McCaskill-Bond and this Paragraph 10 will be agreed upon within 30 days of the Effective Date. The
Protocol Agreement will set forth the process and protocol for conducting negotiations and arbitration,
if applicable, and will include a methodology for allocating the reimbursement provided for in
Paragraph 7. The company(ies) will be parties to the arbitration, if any, in accordance with McCaskill-
Bond. The company(ies) shall provide information requested by the merger representatives for use in
the arbitration, if any, in accordance with requirements of McCaskill-Bond, provided that the
information is relevant to the issues involved in the arbitration, and the requests are reasonable and
do not impose undue burden or expense, and so long as the merger representatives agree to
appropriate confidentiality terms.
g. This Memorandum is not a waiver of any argument that participants may make in the
seniority integration process. Nor do the provisions of this Memorandum constitute an admission as
to the appropriate allocation of flying following the expiration of the protections in Paragraph 8 of this
Memorandum, or the manner in which the respective pre-merger carriers would have operated in the
absence of a merger, or the job entitlements or equities that arguably underlie the construction of an
integrated seniority list, or for any other purpose. This Memorandum may be offered into evidence or
shown to a mediator as background information and to describe the actual operations of the separate
carriers prior to expiration of the protections in Paragraph 8 of this Memorandum.
h. US Airways agrees that neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for
changing the seniority lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the process set forth in
this Paragraph 10.
i. Nothing in this Paragraph 10 shall modify the decision of the arbitration panel in Letter of
Agreement 12-05 of the 2012 CBA."


Now, we see what it says about the previous contracts:


"Once the MTA has been fully implemented, it shall fully displace and render a nullity any prior
collective bargaining agreements applicable to US Airways pilots and any status quo arising thereunder."

R57 relay

You are correct that the east and west pilot did this. Cacti is much more comfortable wrapped in his victim blanket.

USAPA is fighting it. In the first DFR case the 9th circuit ruled that the case couldn't be ripe until a final product was reached and the case couldn't be dependent on anything else. Neither is the case here, but the judge went ahead. They have to fight that point now.

For example, what if the arbitrators used the Nic as some west guys have suggested, or the west guys ended up with something better than the Nic? How are they damaged then?

R57 relay

You west guys and Judge Silver seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouths. On one hand you claim that you didn't know that the MOU didn't include the Nicolau award when you voted for it, and on the other you rapidly filed a lawsuit about it not including the Nicolau award.

cactiboss

Continue living in your repressive state. I'm done dealing with delusional s.

cactiboss

What did the west do to itself? The west has helplessly sat here while being attacked by the east, you think we should have just rolled over and let the beasties have their way? The west is to blame for absolutely nothing here.

DCA A321 FO

Cacti, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?

Fly didn't tell you to roll over, he didn't blame you for anything, and lastly, looks like he is nicely saying USAPA sucks, which they do.

Go ahead and stroke out dude.

thruthemurk

Oh, You're agreeing to binding arbitration? That ought to clear up any ambiguities. What a bunch of clowns you and your group are. As an outside observer it is amazing how much animosity I feel towards the lack of any professional integrity you display.