Wiskey Driver

They never seem to look past right this second and fail to identify the light in the tunnel as a train.

WD at AWA

PurpleTurtle

You completely misunderstood and mischaracterized what I said.

The MOU is a contract and stipulates that a MB process will occur in a very tight timeline. If arbitration occurs according to the MOU contract, and if the merger continues according to the terms of the contract then the SLI will be effective according to the terms of the contract.. and the company and the unions will abide by the terms of the contract.

According to the terms of the contract... that is EXACTLY what Leonidas advised the West pilots... "according to the terms of the MOU". Think about it. Nothing has any meaning or relevance apart from the terms of the contract, no matter how much cheerleading anyone does, or how many donations a for-profit LLC collects.

flybywire44

No, your statement is completely incorrect

This is because in this AAL merger timeline JCBA predates ISL arbitration. Also, the ISL arbitration falls under MKB, which is a Federal Law that supersedes contract law.

American is the reason for MKB and Airways for JCBA before arbitration. The two children will play together if they like it or not!

Eaglefly, please be more accurate with your posts. No need to stir the pot my friend!!!!

757HI

So much for the tight timeline; USAPA has managed to delay the process by 30 days.

Hopefully Silver will grant the west the injunction filed this week to keep the process on track.

eaglefly

There is no such thing as "accuracy" when dealing with USAPA or their logic, only opinion. It's the only entity I know that believes the cart can (and should) pull the horse.

PurpleTurtle

All the parties to the contract agreed to amend the contract, to extend the protocol agreement process 30 days. That's a right that parties to a contract always have.... the right to.... renegotiate. The West has wasted millions of dollars searching for someone to take away that right, even after they voted 98% to do it themselves.

brakechatter

So even though you got caught running off at the mouth with hyperbole, you're just gonna run with it?

Got it.

eaglefly

I didn't get "caught" doing anything. I was QUESTIONING Usapian logic that was confusing to some of those of us on planet Earth. Sounds like you're from the planet USAPA and so it's undertandable you'd "run" with their logic by disregarding their own monstrous hyperbole in considering binding arbitration non-binding or validating the attempt to snooker the west into relinquishing their rights by telling two different stories about what the MOU meant depending on the audience, both of which you seem to accept.

Is a pot black on the planet USAPA like it is on Earth ?

brakechatter

Blah, blah, blah, blah. Blather, blather, blather, blather.

Nobody snookered anybody. The west has been counseled since the start of this thing. Anybody who actually believes that the west has been snookered is the one who is actually snookered--or who is trying to snooker.

That merger was the victim of complete crap merger language in ALPAs constitution and bylaws by: 1) on the snapshot, not considering longevity as part of the merger process--itself a victim of numerous changes in "fair" merger policy and 2) allowing a loophole in the SLI via a single CBS independently ratified as grounds for implementation of the SLI.

There are jerks on both sides--have seen them both. In considering your post, there are jerks on the AA side as well.

The west side is trying to play both sides of the fence, since the one side they attempted to commandeer suddenly appears to have browner grass than the other side.

Plausible deniability don't fly with me. It's funny that the west still considers themselves a victim, for the East merely exploited a loophole. It is the west running around whining, crying, and suing--oh, and you.

PurpleTurtle

This "binding arbitration" drivel is getting old... older than the obviously non-binding award that has never been used.

Here is a question for you.... "What exactly says the Nicalau award is final and binding?"

The ONLY thing that ever said the ALPA internal process would be followed was the 2005 TA, which itself reserved the right to be amended...

.... and the 2005 TA became a nullity on 9 Dec 13 by agreement of the MOU that everyone voted on.

Ergo there is no legal document that retains any "final and binding" for the old, internal ALAP process that was never used.

Move on.