View Poll Results: Who would You Vote for MEC Chairman?
A. Scott S
142
94.67%
B. Derek M
8
5.33%
Voters: 150. You may not vote on this poll
FDX Poll Chairman
03-12-2009, 05:07 AM
#41
Trust but Verify!!
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD11 CRA
Posts: 684
Gotcha. I know I grilled my new MEC rep about his stance on where we are and how we got here. It would be good to know where SS stood then as well as how he would have handled things differently in DW's shoes. Also would love to know what he thinks we should do now. Maybe I'll write him..
03-12-2009, 05:29 AM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Don't forget "Hope"
Unlike the Nov election where the American people wanted "change" but were not smart enough to "change" the right branch of government. We have made some changes to legislative branch and now hope it will lead to some executive changes. I am already seeing some changes in the "cabinet" as the negotiation commitee acknowledges that an agreement that is shoved down the throat of the membership would be a bad idea.
PS I noticed on the Compass Poll on the majors forum you can track how the forum members vote. Is that something you can only do before you vote? Or is something you select when you set up a poll?
03-12-2009, 06:06 AM
#43
...Whatever It Is!
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
Update: Well, you have to start a thread to make a poll, and the thread stays, even if you don't post a poll. I adapted though!
Last edited by MD11Fr8Dog; 03-12-2009 at 06:20 AM.
03-12-2009, 07:16 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 777 Captain in Training
Posts: 1,457
I emailed my 3 block reps and received an answer from all three. The response was nice, which is already more than I can say for the guy who left as my LEC rep.
Funny too that the guy who left declined to run for his own position, but he now feels he should run for Sec/Treas. I guess it is because he knew he stood no chance of winning, but he thinks the good ol' boys might put him in a job. I hope he has completely misjudged his chances of winning.
Funny too that the guy who left declined to run for his own position, but he now feels he should run for Sec/Treas. I guess it is because he knew he stood no chance of winning, but he thinks the good ol' boys might put him in a job. I hope he has completely misjudged his chances of winning.
03-22-2009, 12:47 PM
#46
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Seat 0-A
Posts: 41
I generally avoid posting because you guys are off your rockers on here, but if you truly want someone new, you need to make sure that who you think is new really is.
Whomever you decide to support, just make sure that you know who all was on the team for certain decisions. The only one who might be clean and hasn't seem to have done any union job is David Chase. Seems Scott Stratton was on the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel for Age 60 that recommended the change which the MEC was briefed on by him.
I've also heard that he had some involvement with the FDA LOA tax stuff. Maybe worth asking him about these two things for you Pro Change guys.
Whomever you decide to support, just make sure that you know who all was on the team for certain decisions. The only one who might be clean and hasn't seem to have done any union job is David Chase. Seems Scott Stratton was on the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel for Age 60 that recommended the change which the MEC was briefed on by him.
I've also heard that he had some involvement with the FDA LOA tax stuff. Maybe worth asking him about these two things for you Pro Change guys.
Anyone who was at the LEC meeting that month knows that since SS spoke for over 30 minutes on the subject in front of a very large group of pilots. It started with a slide that said something like: "The Change to Age 65 has the potential to be one of the most divisive unity events in our careers", "We need to do everything that we can to mitigate the negative consequences" or something like that. Cannot remember exactly, but the point was very clear: Mitigation.
The mandate was simple: If this changes, how can we mitigate the negatives in advance of the change and after. This was forward thinking on how this could hurt unity and what we can do about it, not an endorsement for the change.
The point is: This is one of the good guys.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
