Search

Notices

AOL update

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-19-2013, 07:57 PM
  #1721  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
Sounds like you got it all wrapped up.
The defendant doesn't have to give a $hi!. There will never be a majority that will accept the Nic.
PurpleTurtle is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 08:02 PM
  #1722  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Default

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle
The defendant doesn't have to give a $hi!. There will never be a majority that will accept the Nic.
So a majority decides seniority? Better hoe the apa has better morals than your group
cactiboss is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 08:07 PM
  #1723  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 449
Default

Well I guess we could follow the history of the APA merger guide? Would that suit you better?
crzipilot is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 08:18 PM
  #1724  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Default

Originally Posted by crzipilot
Well I guess we could follow the history of the APA merger guide? Would that suit you better?
Isn't that what you are attempting to do to the west?
cactiboss is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 08:45 PM
  #1725  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
So a majority decides seniority? Better hoe the apa has better morals than your group
Its a union. How do you suggest we proceed? Shall we follow a minority?

When it is done, if some believe the outcome is unfair, then they can sue and do their best to meet that burden of proof.

Cheers
PurpleTurtle is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 08:51 PM
  #1726  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Default

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle
Its a union. How do you suggest we proceed? Shall we follow a minority?

When it is done, if some believe the outcome is unfair, then they can sue and do their best to meet that burden of proof.

Cheers
Not according to MB, it is final and binding. So the west can't sue after the fact, not only is it against MB but usapa will be gone.
cactiboss is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 08:58 PM
  #1727  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
Not according to MB, it is final and binding. So the west can't sue after the fact, not only is it against MB but usapa will be gone.

If APA and USAPA agree to something that is outside of a wide range of reasonableness then you most certainly can sue, and if they don't, but go to arbitration instead, then the result will be fair and immediately effective, so you don't have anything to worry about.
PurpleTurtle is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 09:03 PM
  #1728  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Question

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle
If APA and USAPA agree to something that is outside of a wide range of reasonableness then you most certainly can sue, and if they don't, but go to arbitration instead, then the result will be fair and immediately effective, so you don't have anything to worry about.
Man you guys are smart. Heads you win, tails we lose. Looks like you guys thought of everything.
cactiboss is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 09:10 PM
  #1729  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss
Man you guys are smart. Heads you win, tails we lose. Looks like you guys thought of everything.
What's you point?

Are you one of the 12 guys that voted against the MOU?
PurpleTurtle is offline  
Old 11-19-2013, 09:39 PM
  #1730  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Wiskey Driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
Default

Originally Posted by R57 relay
Wow! We are making progress. A little.

So you admit that was(is) in the TA. The reason that it is in there is really immaterial. It's there and due to the fact that we didn't have a JCBA, the east pilots were able to use it for a purpose other than it was intended, or at least what you think it was intended for. Anyway, again I ask what ALPA told you about that, what could be done about it and what risk it held for west pilots. Be honest.

The law of unintended consequences.
Ok you are still missing the meat here. The equal vote was for a collective agreement and had nothing to do with seniority what to ever. The award stated that the it goes into effect upon entering a new contract and that benefit was there for the sake of the company not the pilots.

Now you keep asking what national said about the TA and they said nothing concerning the TA. Now maybe what you are asking is what national said after the east marched on Herndon. ALPA national came to us with " the east is very upset and wishes to have a sit down to discuss their seniority concerns" Their exact words too. We informed ALPA that any and all concerns the east MEC has have been addressed in arbitration and we do not wish to re-visit this issue as we deem it closed. John Prater is the one who played for the east mec and kept breathing life into what everyone on earth knew was a dead issue.

Prater had violated the merger policy by refusing to turn over the list to LCC management. He was being told by the east MEC that if he were to give that list to management the east would decertify ALPA. Paul Rice reached out to us both individually and jointly seeking a sit down with the east. We informed him that absent that list being turned over we would not attend. He pleaded for us not to do that and he held a special MEC meeting where the decision was split as to attend or not attend. We finally made the decision to go just to listen. ALPA national was all about saving the property within ALPA and not concerned either way as to the outcome of the arbitration.

There were 2 of these such meetings held and then the offer for wye river. These meetings were all the same and that was the east asking for more than they got in arbitration. There was nothing and I mean ZERO in the way of any offering to the west for what would have been a tremendous gift on our part. The same smug ass attitude that the east brought to each and every joint meeting and arbitration was present there and we saw no reason what so ever to give them anything. They asked for a 5yr fence and one of us counted with "ok you can have the fence but you get no contract improvements for that duration once we get the contract". Now this was just a joke but the east said hell no which showed us all that they are a bunch of greedy ass pigs that want everything.

The last ditch effort was Eric Rowe making a comment that he had spoken with a group that wanted to decertify ALPA and that he felt they were strong enough to do it. He and that council were being watched from that point on and they got caught. The PHL council was placed in trustee and he did everything he could from that point on to aid usapa.

They hired that hack of a lawyer Lee Seham under the assumption that he could deliver DOH and a contract in 90 days. Well tons of money later, no DOH and no contract Lee was fired.

Our merger council Jeff Fruend told the AOL guys that a suit at that time was not ripe but they filed anyway fearing statue of limitation issues. I disagreed with their understanding of statue of limitations but this made little difference once that train left the station.

I enjoy these little tours down memory lane and I really don't expect much in the way of your understanding what went down.

WD at AWA
Wiskey Driver is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
gettinbumped
United
0
12-11-2012 11:29 AM
cactiboss
American
29
05-16-2012 06:24 PM
LifeNtheFstLne
United
51
11-16-2010 11:47 AM
HSLD
Hiring News
2
11-14-2006 04:32 PM
HSLD
Hiring News
1
02-08-2006 10:37 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices