FreighterGuyNow

We can start by clarifying USAPA is not seeking to overturn the award.

The arbitration you and we agreed to was entirely contingent upon a ratified contract between the 3 parties to it: US Airways, ALPA America West and ALPA US Airways.

No contract was ever reached and will now never be reached so the award is moot.

Dutch1

The implementation of the award is contingent upon a joint contract. The award itself may stand and the MOU, being a joint contract, may trigger implementation. The judge will rule.

cactiboss

Nah not geniuses, scum liars is what it makes them. Did you know not a single usapa officer could say what 10h in the mou meant? Did u know that Symansky claimed he knew what it meant but refused to say it under oath? Scum.

Wiskey Driver

Well there in lies a major problem. See usapa failed to disclose that little gem in the MOU. See by LAW usapa had a fiduciaryresponsibility to disclose to the voting pilots that by signing this document it does away with a groups rights. They did not do this and you can expect that the court will not allow it fly. This is but one reason why the west is a separate class.

The AOL lawyers had not reason to think otherwise because they have the usapa lawyer on video claiming that the mou is neutral on seniority only later usapa adds 10H which is fraud. Don't pin your hopes on 10h as there is a long list of usapa attempts to circumvent that award. Smart money says that MB panel will use the award to avoid further litigation and expense to money players (company).

WD at AWA

Wiskey Driver

Ok lets examine this further shall we. Its your opinion that since the east was able to delay by not voting in a better contract that somehow this allows for the dismissal of the original award?? I think you best do some research into the outcomes of attempts like this in the past. Usapa has done nothing new and if this is the basis for your argument it will fail.

WD at AWA

jayme

So Its Your Position That The West Knowingly Signed Away The Nic Award?

Buddyfish

That's pretty much what happened. How often do you see 98% of any group vote the same way for something. The plan was to vote in the MOU then claim they had been duped. That much was even discussed in emails between some of AOL's top leaders. Problem is 2 out of the 4 USAPA "scabs" that helped craft the MOU language are west pilots.

Any who, it's all up to the Judge now and probably appeals court later. Arguing over who was really too naive to read and understand a 15 page MOU or who was brilliant enough to fool the AOL lawyers and 98% of the west pilots is irrelevant.

Wiskey Driver

Ok let me put this to you another way. Lets say you are selling your house and all looks good on the surface, the price is right great neighborhood and the buyer is ready to sign and pay. Now there is a secret that you are holding because you want to make this deal and get your money. The house foundation is weak because it was poorly done and its going to crumble. Now you fail to tell the buyer this and claim you had no idea but there is proof that you did know.

This is called DISCLOSURE!! You failed in your responsibility to make it known that the property had faults. This same standard is applied to unions and its members. There is video evidence with the court of usapa's lawyer claiming that the mou is seniority neutral but in reality it was something different. Now just apply the reasonable person test. Would a reasonable person sign away their rights given the situation? The answer is clear here as well as usapa's intent to defraud

WD at AWA

FreighterGuyNow

Overturn?

Dismissal?

Wrong words.

Delay?

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT


Plaintiffs’ alleged hardship cannot instead be premised on any delay caused by USAPA in reaching a single CBA. As the district court noted, Plaintiffs abandoned their claim that USAPA is intentionally delaying negotiation of a CBA. Addington,

cactiboss

Hey look, another binding arbitration the east pilots refuse to live by: