Legal Postings

Legal Postings: Addington II - Appeal to Ninth Circuit

Today, July 14, the Addington plaintiffs filed a request (Doc 11) to extend the time for filing their Opening Brief thirty days from July 30 to August 29. This case is in the appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from the decision and order issued by Judge Silver in Addington II on January 10, 2014 (Doc 298).

Under the Ninth Circuit’s rules this is what is known as a “streamlined” request. It will be automatically granted and an order will be issued either later today or sometime tomorrow granting the request and pushing back the dates for filing the other briefs accordingly. 


Legal Posting – McCaskill Bond Injunction Action

Yesterday, July 2, the Defendants (the Company and APA) in the McCaskill Bond Injunction Action filed the Reply Brief with respect to the motion to stay discovery.  It makes no new arguments, simply claiming that arbitration of MTA Dispute #5 will resolve the dispute without saying how, or even identifying the issue the arbitrator will resolve.  The pending motions (to compel arbitration of MTA Dispute #5 and to stay discovery) are now fully briefed.  The court will either issue an order setting a hearing on the motions or will just issue a decision.  We will keep you informed of the any developments.

 USAPA Communications

Legal Postings - NMB AA/US Airways Single Carrier Update

Earlier this week, on Monday June 16, USAPA filed a Supplemental Position Statement and Exhibits with the National Mediation Board in the pending AA/US Airways Single Carrier Application. The supplement and attached exhibits are linked below and posted in the Legal Library.

The AA/US Airways Single Carrier Application was filed in January 2014, by the Allied Pilots Association. The application asks the NMB to determine that American and US Airways constitute a single carrier for purposes of the Railway Labor Act and that the NMB should determine the appropriate representative for an alleged single craft or class of pilots employed by the two carriers. The NMB is conducting an ongoing investigation of the facts and the parties have submitted several position statements, and supplements to those statements, in the course of the investigation.


Legal Posting - US Airways v. USAPA et al - Complaint For Temporary Restraining Order/Injunctive Relief

Late Friday (June 13) afternoon, Judge Conrad from the Western District of North Carolina issued an Order denying USAPA’s motion to vacate the permanent injunction entered back in January 2012 in US Airways, Inc. v. USAPA & Michael Cleary, 3:11-cv-371-RJC-DCK.  As previously reported, USAPA filed the motion to vacate on the basis that the permanent injunction was no longer necessary as a result of  the four-party Memorandum of Understanding regarding Contingent Collective Bargaining Agreement (“MOU”).  It was also argued that USAPA’s good faith compliance with the permanent injunction for over two years weighed in favor of vacating the injunction.  The Company raised various arguments but the one that Judge Conrad apparently keyed in on was that continuing the injunction was not inequitable because “the parties are about to enter into collective bargaining negotiations” and USAPA’s motion was “filed on the eve of negotiations for a joint collective bargaining agreement (“JCBA”)”.


McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action – Update

Judge Howell held a conference call with counsel in the McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action at 11:30 am this morning, Friday, June 13, 2014.   The reason for the call was to address the request of APA and the Company to delay discovery until the Court decided the pending motions to require USAPA to arbitrate MTA Dispute #5.

As background: in late February, USAPA filed a complaint in the United States District Court in the District of Columbia asking the Court to issue an injunction requiring  APA and the Company to follow the requirements of the McCaskill-Bond Amendment and promptly submit the seniority integration dispute involving the pilots of American Airlines and US Airways, to arbitration (the “McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action”).  APA and the Company filed answers which called for denying USAPA’s claim and also filed various counterclaims alleging, among other things, that APA would be in complete control of the Seniority List Integration (SLI) process once it became the certified representative for the combined group of AA and US pilots.  APA and the Company later filed a grievance (MTA Dispute #5) under the Merger Transition Agreement (the MOU) alleging that USAPA was violating the MOU by insisting that the parties follow the McCaskill-Bond Amendment.  USAPA refused to participate in arbitrating MTA Dispute #5 because the issue was already before the District Court.  APA and the Company then filed motions asking the District Court to require USAPA to arbitrate MTA Dispute #5.  Those motions have been briefed and are pending before the District Court. 


Legal Posting - McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action

Yesterday you received reply papers filed by the APA and the Carriers in the McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action.  The following exhibits were filed on May 30, 2014, in support of those reply papers. All filings are posted in the Legal Library:


Legal Postings - McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action and Proposed Agreements Response

These filings (also posted in the Legal Library) were made by APA and the Carriers in the McCaskill-Bond Injunction proceeding yesterday (Friday, May 30):


Legal Postings – Cleary v. USAPA and McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action

Cleary v. USAPA

Yesterday, May 27, 2014, former USAPA President Michael Cleary filed an action (Complaint) in the Superior Court of North Carolina alleging that he was due compensation for unused vacation time during his tenure as President. The Board of Pilot Representatives had previously considered this claim and rejected it.


Legal Posting - Davis v. PBGC, Supreme Court Amicus Curiae Brief

Earlier today, May 23, 2014, USAPA and CAPA jointly filed and served a motion in the US Supreme Court seeking permission to file a brief as amici curiae (click here) in support of the petitioners in Davis v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, Supreme Court Case No. 13-1280.  An amicus curiae brief is a submission to a court (usually an appellate court) by an individual or entity that is not a party to the litigation, but nonetheless has an interest in the case and seeks to offer its position on the issues before the court.  In the Davis v. PBGC case, the Supreme Court has not yet granted certiorari (meaning the Court has not decided whether to hear the merits of the case), therefore, USAPA and CAPA’s amicus curiae brief argues why it is important for the Court to grant certiorari and decide the questions presented by the Davis plaintiffs.


You are here: Home News Legal Postings Legal Postings

Industry Links

Safety Hotline

(800) 341-7176 or
(704) 209-7553
File ASAP Report

Contact Us

Phone: 704-972-7198
Fax: (704) 936-4592

200 East Woodlawn Road, Suite 250
Charlotte, NC 28217