R57 relay

I'm not missing anything. If I was we wouldn't be arguing about this almost 7 years later. The reason the separate ratification was put in there doesn't matter, what mattes is that it was. The circumstances then dictated that one side decided to use it. You were bitten by that language. And you were told about the implications of putting a line in the sand. You were told that there was no mandatory timeline for reaching a JCBA and that without one you could not use the Nic. Kirby told you too, in the form of "a lottery ticket you cannot cash."

The rest of your timeline I agree with, just find it amazing that you would "joke" about the east getting no contract improvements. Not sure why I'm amazed, it's kind of true to form.

R57 relay

Hey cacti,

I think you said you weren't a member of USAPA so if not you don't have access to the website. Have someone that does go pull document 281-2 Exhibit A. Very interesting reading from the mouth of the west and it's not on cactuspilot yet.

PurpleTurtle

The West pilots were better informed about the MOU killing the TransitionAgreement than the East was. All their emails about it came out in trial.

""It is clearly an attempt by USAPA to negate the transition agreement"... "Marty seemed to be dismissive of this idea last night, but I think he's dead wrong, as well."

"In my mind, the question is not "should we be endorsing the MOU", but how soon we should seek an injunction against it."

The West got punked by their own lawyers.

cactiboss

I'll let you know when I read them.

Wiskey Driver

To really understand all of this one must remove all emotion. Again no one was bitten by any language as you have suggested. The language about the JCBA was separate from the seniority issue. The line in the sand was the east's refusal to move from DOH and they had several opportunities leading up to the conclusion of the arbitration to do so.

I have already pointed out that there was nothing in the way of any offering for the west to move off what we were awarded. In other words all gains would have gone east. The west mec was not listening to Kirby because his motives were clear. There was no offering from the company for us to move only scare tactics in the way of using words like lottery ticket. The east latched on to his words like they came from GOD almighty but I remind you not east or company made any offerings.

I see you didn't read my post well or you feel that I am the villain. I said that a sort of joke was made but at no time did I indicate that it was me that made the joke!! In any event it was more of a "you guys want the moon, ok this is the cost"? No one on either side was to take it seriously.

WD at AWA

cactiboss

I just read the exhibits. Looks to me like they were discussing the mou and trying to find meaning in it. Some thought 10h was problematic and others believed it was neutral. I don't see this affecting anything.

Wiskey Driver

post so we can all read it please

WD at AWA

crzipilot

Yup they were sitting around the camp fire trying to find meaning in the MOU. What does it mean status quo is gone?!? What does it mean all prior agreements are void( or whatever term is used)

Then they were hoodwinked by those bad easties/usapians

Not gonna paste just for the fact it has names and emails listed on it. You know kinda like personal info..... Make me feel dirty

It is on cactuspilot

crzipilot

"Mark,

I sure hope you are correct. The part of your theory that bothers me is that yes, the company accepted the Nic, but there are conditions in the TA that need to be satisfied in order for it to be utilized. If the MOU does away with the TA, then those conditions are never met.

Pat"

"The MOU is worthless especially when taking into account all we have suffered in one form or another for the past eight years. The MOU is even more worthless without the Nicolau Award. It's as worthless as tits on a boar."

I really like this one...

"We should establish... unequivocally that the Wet pilots (despite how they vote on the MOU) are adamantly against any seniority integration process that does not include the NIC as the starting point..."

"If Marty and Andy are dead wrong... then why don't we fire them and give Mitch a call......"

"It is clearly an attempt by USAPA to negate the transition agreement"... "Marty seemed to be dismissive of this idea last night, but I think he's dead wrong, as well."

"In my mind, the question is not "should we be endorsing the MOU", but how soon we should seek an injunction against it."

"Does this mean USAPA is smarter than we are?"

PurpleTurtle

The exhibits demonstrate that the West leadership had clear concerns/knowledge of what affect the MOU had on the 2005 TA, and despite this Leonidas LLC still recommended the West pilots vote for the MOU...

"We recommend that West pilots vote yes if they want to see a merger with American according to the terms of the MOU. Sincerely, Leonidas, LCC"


Now if one implicitly assumes that USAPA is guilty of a DFR then of course this does nothing to prove a legitimate union purpose. These exhibits merely show that any West claim that they didn't have fair warning about what they voted on is not borne out by the facts. If anything their leadership was greatly informed and some of them disagreed vehemently with Marty Harper, some even suggesting he should have been fired. If one is trying to prove USAPA is guilty of bad faith for hiding info, then the facts of the exhibits clearly show the accusation is misplaced or misdirected.