eaglefly

Illogical delusion is all you have, but hey...........the world needs it looks too.

GrapeNuts

I think EF pretty much sums it up well. Seems you don't like the reality which is staring you in the face. Eventually, you and your bud R57 are going to have to swallow the medicine.

Route66

We'll just have to watch it play out in the courts, now won't we???

Enjoy your day.

SewerPipeDvr

This is a rather simple argument. Be careful, the East chose their Counsel for a reason. Still I agree with you, the East won't get very far. Parker has a LOT of money behind him. If he does not want separate ops, it ain't gonna happen. I don't think he can play that hand again, as this is not some little immaterial airline, this is the biggest carrier in the National Airway System. The Feds won't let that happen.

GrapeNuts

But that's just it: the courts will not be involved with the upcoming SLI arbitration. You seem to think the APA will follow the path you and your east buddies chose, which Parker was more than happy to endorse because it saved him a few billion in pilot labor costs over the past 8 years. USAPA is gone, you are a minority pilot group and there is tremendous interest in getting this operation put together since the company not only doesn't save money with separate ops, it LOSES money and efficiency by separate ops. The LAA and LAW pilots benefit from a combined operation and the company benefits even more, your side is now a small, insignificant minority. This is hard for you to accept, but as I said before, you (USAPA Blowhards) are no longer in control of the situation. The SLI arbitration will occur as scheduled, without interruption, regardless of what you easties attempt.

Wiskey Driver

Hmmmm I am not sure who told you that but I can assure you that unless you have a lower court decision you CAN NOT go before the appellant division. What is the lower court ruling for which you think there is an action? Just post the docket link and let us all read it.

Let me say this to you again, no case comes before an appellant court UNLESS there is a lower court ruling. What is the lower court ruling for which you plan or have been told that an action exists??

I am really trying to get you to see this for yourself without having to explain it to you.

Finally there is but one list here at LUS that has been determined via a mutual agreed upon process. That list still exists and only ONE party has a case for which action can be brought. Now sure the east via usapa can file a law suit but make no mistake that this time should the faction of usapa plan to do that I would expect an anti slap suit to follow. In any event they can not hold up the process and I would further expect any action brought by the faction to die in summary judgement.

WD at AWA

eaglefly

Well, I don't think Parker WANTS that outcome as although it worked for him in the past, it is counter-productive in this instance. One of the issues Parker had to overcome to get the AAG BOD approval is an essentially bulletproof merger completion timeline that cannot be subverted by the usual obstructionist tactics by USAPA when their version of reality is rejected by managements, other unions, arbitrators and judges as it always seems to be. Parker and the AAG BOD knew they had a bull in the china shop before they opened for business and any intransigent obstructionism this time around will become nothing more then a minor speed bump.

As for the Feds not allowing anything, I'm not sure of that. As it stands right now the fragmented carrier is wildly profitable and serving the needs of most, if not all travelers. The synergies of merger completion (SLI) will only improve that, but if the previous US Airways could operate fragmented in perpituity (and let's face it, that WAS the most quantifiable conclusion), theoretically, I don't see how this one couldn't.

Not going to be an issue though as from what I see, this is nothing more then USAPA going through its inevitable death throes in writhing agony with the final "death rattle" imminent. The carcass will then be promptly buried before it stinks up the joint.

Just trust them

Never say never.

Doug has run an airline with one certificate and two separate pilot groups before. Why wouldn't he try to do it with three separate pilot groups and one, or even two certificates?

He already has the synergies and is making profits in the billions. And then there's the Country Club bragging rights of having the biggest and most innovative whipsaw ever at his disposal.

The Feds won't let it happen? Just like their political masters, they are safely in the pockets of their benefactors.

Just maybe the APA doesn't realize that rather than being a co-master of the game with Doug, they have been in play since the first day his team walked through the door.

Time will tell.

flyinawa

I disagree with your assertion about the similarity. USAir was highly profitable relative to its peers because 2/3 of the pilot group insisted on operating on a bankruptcy contract in exchange for separate operations. I'm sure the Mr. Parker's bean counters ran the numbers and decided the contractual money savings was more than accommodating. That pay disparity no longer exists and that dissolves the cost advantage to separate ops...therefore management won't allow it.

Or maybe I'm completely off base.

Route66

You need to reread:
1. The amended complaint
2. Judge Silvers ruling
3. The Company's "mootness" answer (in appeals)
4. AOL support of USAPA in the DICTA argument
5. And lastly, the PAB ignoring the Ninth in their "award" without addressing the merits of the statute.

It really becomes a question of how (not necessarily IF) the PAB award gets entered into the record of the Ninth regarding the "dicta" issue. They would probably remand it back to Silvers court for a ruling consistent with M-B.

Remember, the OFFICIAL timeline for the finality of seniority integration was Dec 9, 2013. At that time, under M-B APA represented LAA and USAPA represented LUS. That is the trigger measure date for who represents who, NOT Sept. 16, 2014.

There are SEVERAL Ninth/Supreme Court rulings that have allowed arbitration rulings to be vacated.

But, well just have to see.