uSAPa slapped down by PHX jury

Not to say Airways is an angel, but I would really like to know how a 25 plus year seniority USAirways pilot losing his seniority to a 2 year West pilot qualifies as rape...

Sorry, but trying to staple 80% of the other pilot group's pilots to the bottom of your seniority list is rape, I don't care how much longevity you have. East pilots need to learn the difference between longevity and seniority. They aren't the same thing. A 20-year East pilot has a lot of longevity, but he doesn't have jack for seniority.

Without injecting any personal viewpoints about USAPA/West, can someone please tell me what the outcome of this decision could be if it is upheld on appeal? If these kind of cases are so hard to win, what are the precedents in terms of previous victories in terms of "damages"?

DFR suits are very rarely successful. The law gives unions a "wide range of reasonableness" to conduct their affairs internally, and courts don't like to intervene. That's what makes this case so incredible. Actually winning a DFR suit, especially with a unanimous jury verdict, is amazing.

To answer your question, though, the relief that the judge could render could be both monetary and injunctive. He could issue an injunction against uSAPa to order them not to seek DOH seniority integration, for example.

Could a negative ruling on this issue in any way bankrupt USAPA?

uSAPa is well on their way to bankruptcy already. I'd be very surprised if they last another year. They are currently having to use special assessments to fund ongoing union activities, including the appeal that they're going to file on this ruling. That brings the grand total to three separate special assessments that uSAPa members are having to pay to fund the "union's" operations, not including their normal dues rate. They are hemorrhaging money.

Could a court find that USAPA is in fact not representing the entire group and order them dissolved and USAir back to ALPA?

No, that decision was made by a valid vote under the NMB rules, even though it was right down party lines with the East majority outvoting the smaller West group, so a judge can't undo it.

With the decision that USAPA is not representing West guys, does this cripple any chance USAPA has of collecting back-dues? If some West guys have been paying agency fees to USAPA, can they demand repayment of those fees because of this ruling?

I'm sure they're requesting large amounts of monetary relief as part of their litigation, so that could be considered repayment of agency fees, but most of the pilots aren't paying them, anyway. Most of the West pilots are refusing to even pay the agency fee, and the company won't terminate them like the East wants.
 
Sorry, but trying to staple 80% of the other pilot group's pilots to the bottom of your seniority list is rape, I don't care how much longevity you have. East pilots need to learn the difference between longevity and seniority. They aren't the same thing. A 20-year East pilot has a lot of longevity, but he doesn't have jack for seniority.



DFR suits are very rarely successful. The law gives unions a "wide range of reasonableness" to conduct their affairs internally, and courts don't like to intervene. That's what makes this case so incredible. Actually winning a DFR suit, especially with a unanimous jury verdict, is amazing.

To answer your question, though, the relief that the judge could render could be both monetary and injunctive. He could issue an injunction against uSAPa to order them not to seek DOH seniority integration, for example.



uSAPa is well on their way to bankruptcy already. I'd be very surprised if they last another year. They are currently having to use special assessments to fund ongoing union activities, including the appeal that they're going to file on this ruling. That brings the grand total to three separate special assessments that uSAPa members are having to pay to fund the "union's" operations, not including their normal dues rate. They are hemorrhaging money.



No, that decision was made by a valid vote under the NMB rules, even though it was right down party lines with the East majority outvoting the smaller West group, so a judge can't undo it.



I'm sure they're requesting large amounts of monetary relief as part of their litigation, so that could be considered repayment of agency fees, but most of the pilots aren't paying them, anyway. Most of the West pilots are refusing to even pay the agency fee, and the company won't terminate them like the East wants.

Thanks for this reply ATN - Cliff's Notes sound like there are options, but nobody really knows what will happen or even have a hunch based upon the rarity of this kind of ruling.
 
It's about the same as calling ALPA ALPO.

I realize that. But, its bad to call ALPA that and its alright to call USAPA that....

If I recall correctly, Todd blew a gasket at a poster who did that, but no one is calling him out for using the same juvenile tactic?
 
I realize that. But, its bad to call ALPA that and its alright to call USAPA that....

If I recall correctly, Todd blew a gasket at a poster who did that, but no one is calling him out for using the same juvenile tactic?

Report the post and we'll start a discussion about it.
 
Report the post and we'll start a discussion about it.

Ok so since I qualified my previous post with "if I recall correctly".... I will correct myself here. I did not recall correctly. However, most of the memory stands and that being said, I see a double-standard: calling out someone while turning around and doing it himself.

I shouldn't even respond to someone who's so juvenile to use the term "ALPO," but what the hell. ALPA's flow-through agreements are working pretty well. A huge number of pilots from Mesaba and Compass will be flowing to Delta over the next 10 years. The Eagle agreement didn't work out too well, but it's much harder to get a favorable flow-through when the mainline carrier is represented by a different union. In-fighting has been going on between the two groups for years.

Yes, it was until you launched an attack on ALPA.

So, it's alright to attack one pilot negotiating group, but not another?
 
Nah, I'm just trying to say that if you see something that you feel is inappropriate, report the post, it'll start a new thread in our moderator section and we'll usually argue back and forth for a few hours and make a ruling.

I know that "I'm the man" but use the tool! :)
 
Nah, I'm just trying to say that if you see something that you feel is inappropriate, report the post, it'll start a new thread in our moderator section and we'll usually argue back and forth for a few hours and make a ruling.

I know that "I'm the man" but use the tool! :)

Well my bad, I messed up. The post, doesn't seem to be reportable, it doesn't violate the TOS.... though I don't read that daily. Nothing inappropriate to see here, or there, keep moving moderators :)
 
Seriously, you have a very good point though. I'm not really fan of ad hominem monikers as I think it's unprofessional so I certainly will look at it shortly. I think I brought down the hammer on someone saying "HoJets" so why wouldn't I do the same for uSAPa?
 
Seriously, you have a very good point though. I'm not really fan of ad hominem monikers as I think it's unprofessional so I certainly will look at it shortly. I think I brought down the hammer on someone saying "HoJets" so why wouldn't I do the same for uSAPa?

Tis the life.... :) Time to get back on topic perhaps people?
 
So now we've resorted to comparing the usage of ALPO when referencing ALPA, to calling uSAPa instead of USAPA, the letters are the same. What's the deal? One is clearly incorrect, the other is well - not incorrect - as there has been no alteration to the acronym.

"HoJets" wrong It's suppose to be GoJets
uSAPa, not wrong, because well, it is usapa, or USAPA, or uSaPa, or UsApA.
 
So now we've resorted to comparing the usage of ALPO when referencing ALPA, to calling uSAPa instead of USAPA, the letters are the same. What's the deal? One is clearly incorrect, the other is well - not incorrect - as there has been no alteration to the acronym.

"HoJets" wrong It's suppose to be GoJets
uSAPa, not wrong, because well, it is usapa, or USAPA, or uSaPa, or UsApA.

However, it is clearly not in the spirit of being professional. I refuse to believe a professional would mistype it unintentionally so many times. And who on earth (well unless you're a 1337-5p34k3r) capitalizes specific portions of aCrOnYmS lIkE ThIs? It's either usapa or USAPA. I don't really care about the organization myself, I just want to see some professional integrity from those who represent us, both grammatically and in a sense of being level-headed and reasonable, rather than using "name-calling" tactics.
 
So now we've resorted to comparing the usage of ALPO when referencing ALPA, to calling uSAPa instead of USAPA, the letters are the same. What's the deal? One is clearly incorrect, the other is well - not incorrect - as there has been no alteration to the acronym.

"HoJets" wrong It's suppose to be GoJets
uSAPa, not wrong, because well, it is usapa, or USAPA, or uSaPa, or UsApA.

Seriously?

Hmm, air line pilots ASSociation.

Does this mean I won't get in trouble?

*PS, just to make sure, that word was not directed to you, or anybody else.
 
So now we've resorted to comparing the usage of ALPO when referencing ALPA, to calling uSAPa instead of USAPA, the letters are the same. What's the deal? One is clearly incorrect, the other is well - not incorrect - as there has been no alteration to the acronym.

"HoJets" wrong It's suppose to be GoJets
uSAPa, not wrong, because well, it is usapa, or USAPA, or uSaPa, or UsApA.
I'm not a fan of USAPA, in fact I think they're kind of despicable. But the above is like saying that Brittney is really interested in seeking out amy.
 
So now we've resorted to comparing the usage of ALPO when referencing ALPA, to calling uSAPa instead of USAPA, the letters are the same. What's the deal? One is clearly incorrect, the other is well - not incorrect - as there has been no alteration to the acronym.

"HoJets" wrong It's suppose to be GoJets
uSAPa, not wrong, because well, it is usapa, or USAPA, or uSaPa, or UsApA.

Negative, Ghostrider.

Just trying to keep it professional. That or steer it back towards being professional when it comes to important topics.
 
Seriously?

Hmm, air line pilots ASSociation.

Does this mean I won't get in trouble?

*PS, just to make sure, that word was not directed to you, or anybody else.

Personally, I'd break out the user-be-good stick on this one.
 
Back
Top