AOL update
02-23-2013, 12:28 PM
#182
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 238
I think USAPA's statement complaining that the West Pilots will not negotiate seniority with their own union is pretty much admitting the West is not being fairly represented.
Of course, this is only my opinion. The only opinion that really matters is the judge this will once again eventually be in front.
02-23-2013, 12:42 PM
#183
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,299
Again as an outsider, I don't think that is the same thing at all. I have never seen a union say that some subset of members would not negotiate with their own union.
I think USAPA's statement complaining that the West Pilots will not negotiate seniority with their own union is pretty much admitting the West is not being fairly represented.
Of course, this is only my opinion. The only opinion that really matters is the judge this will once again eventually be in front.
I think USAPA's statement complaining that the West Pilots will not negotiate seniority with their own union is pretty much admitting the West is not being fairly represented.
Of course, this is only my opinion. The only opinion that really matters is the judge this will once again eventually be in front.
Maybe it's the word negotiation. Trust me, I've seen plenty of back and forth between factions in the union before, and it is a type of internal negotiation.
You are correct about the judge and no one can say for sure how that will turn out.
02-23-2013, 12:43 PM
#184
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Again as an outsider, I don't think that is the same thing at all. I have never seen a union say that some subset of members would not negotiate with their own union.
I think USAPA's statement complaining that the West Pilots will not negotiate seniority with their own union is pretty much admitting the West is not being fairly represented.
Of course, this is only my opinion. The only opinion that really matters is the judge this will once again eventually be in front.
I think USAPA's statement complaining that the West Pilots will not negotiate seniority with their own union is pretty much admitting the West is not being fairly represented.
Of course, this is only my opinion. The only opinion that really matters is the judge this will once again eventually be in front.
02-23-2013, 02:55 PM
#185
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff US Airways, Inc. (“US Airways”)
2 respectfully submits this statement in support of the Addington Defendants’ Amended
3 Motion for Class Certification, dated June 24, 2011 [Doc. No. 91].
4 For the reasons set out in its Complaint for Declaratory Relief, dated July
5 26, 2010 [Doc. No. 1], US Airways agrees that this Court should certify a defendant class
6 comprised of “[a]ll pilots employed by the airline US Airways in September 2008 who
7 were on the America West seniority list on September 20, 2005”
2 respectfully submits this statement in support of the Addington Defendants’ Amended
3 Motion for Class Certification, dated June 24, 2011 [Doc. No. 91].
4 For the reasons set out in its Complaint for Declaratory Relief, dated July
5 26, 2010 [Doc. No. 1], US Airways agrees that this Court should certify a defendant class
6 comprised of “[a]ll pilots employed by the airline US Airways in September 2008 who
7 were on the America West seniority list on September 20, 2005”
Last edited by cactiboss; 02-23-2013 at 03:14 PM.
02-23-2013, 03:03 PM
#186
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Yes, you are correct. As long as no one touches the Nic. there isn't an issue. Again if company and apa don't help usapa there isn't a problem at all. The west supports the merger 100%, as a matter of fact 98% of the west voted for the Mou compared with only about 55% of the phl based east pilots.
02-23-2013, 03:18 PM
#187
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Really, have they tried to change those pilots seniority and been found guilty of dfr to a legally classified class for doing it? Didn't think so. The west is a distinct class for legal action created by judge wake and reiterated by judge Silver. Again "dismissed for ripeness" doesn't erase the case and the facts associated with it. You realize we can go back to Wake and ask for summary judgement once we feel "ripeness" has been triggered right?
You can ask for a summary judgement but you won't get it. More likely another jury trial.
02-23-2013, 03:29 PM
#188
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Yes, you are correct. As long as no one touches the Nic. there isn't an issue. Again if company and apa don't help usapa there isn't a problem at all. The west supports the merger 100%, as a matter of fact 98% of the west voted for the Mou compared with only about 55% of the phl based east pilots.
You also have stated that the MOU is, itself, a DFR violation because it fails to explicitly include the Nic. If so, it's a DFR against the West that 98% of the West voted for. I really have trouble following your logic. You're saying that the West pilots voted to disenfranchise themselves, in order that they could later sue for being disenfranchised.
02-23-2013, 03:31 PM
#189
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
When a case has been vacated, yes, it does in fact erase the case back to square one. From a legal standpoint, they were NOT found guilty of a DFR. The DFR lawsuit never happened, there were no findings, it was all just a dream. Go quoting DFR 1 in a courtroom and you will get nowhere. Yes, even in Judge Wake's courtroom.
You can ask for a summary judgement but you won't get it. More likely another jury trial.
02-23-2013, 04:04 PM
#190
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
I've read and searched the Declaratory Judgement thoroughly. Although DFR1 is mentioned as part of the "Background", it is not quoted or referenced in the actual judgement, nor is any evidence presented from it. Only the appeal is quoted.
This is the only reference:
"In 2008, a group of West Pilots sued USAPA claiming USAPA had breached its duty of fair representation by refusing to adopt the Nicolau Award during negotiations with US Airways. The case was certified as a class action and proceeded to trial where the West Pilots prevailed. On appeal, however, the case was dismissed as not presenting a ripe controversy."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
