4A2B

man you are a broken record, you or I are not the one needing any convincing if that is what you think the Union is doing through their messaging. If they are trying to convince (either way) the 4 I am sure they are doing so directly, I would hope so, since we pay good money for the services at ALPA. This discussion is not about who did what it was meant to be about a rebuttal to Tony that all the Union chest beating in the world is not going to help the 4, it is out of our hands, period end of story. Since we have no ability to exercise any real pressure, legally.

So don't go now and compare this to our lack of resolve to get a new CBA...blah blah blah..Just leading the next reply.

FDXLAG

You admit the VC is encouraging them to settle but you dont think the VC speaks for the union. Thanks for telling me what this discussion is about. It make debate so much more concise when you can arbitrarily discard any other discussion points other than the ones you want to talk about. But dont like my opinion so you attack. OK, you are ugly.

Busboy

What do the VC have to do with this? Are you saying Charlie has infiltrated the MEC?

4A2B

No the VC does not speak for the Union, he speaks for himself and has not done a very good job of it at that. He should really think twice about the need to ramble weekly about nothing productive, like begging for 2 dollars for the PAC just so we can show higher participation numbers.

I am just tired of all the same circular debates on this forum as soon as someone takes an alternative position then you guys drag out , 4a2b, the interim TA, the FDA LOA's....so I think it is time to take a break from this waste of time talking about the past and what someone else is doing wrong at ALPA or the Company.

I know you wont miss me, LAG you should put your angst to work fixing things for real. Pick shovel and pick avenue Company or ALPA and dive in, people with your insight and intelligence need to play not sit on the little boys bench and whine. At least TonyC had bled for this outfit. Thanks Tony.

FDXLAG

See post 169.

FDXLAG

More personal attacks, If you dont want to hear that confessing to theft and fraud could be bad for your career dont say going to arbitration can be bad for your career. Do you think that is the 1st time we have heard that? No angst from me, I am busy solving real world problems. Sorry if you dont approve of my choices, but that is your problem. Glad to hear you are getting on with your life. Sorry I called you ugly.

TonyC

That IS the process in the CBA, but I am told it's not exactly the path The Company used. They eventually got around to going through the major wickets, but they didn't start it off very well.

Mind you, The Company is not compelled to pursue the process to the end -- they can stop and reevaluate at any time, consider facts which they unaware of when they began. Would it be hard for them to admit they made a mistake? Absolutely. They might require some persuasion, or some help seeing the light, or an offer of a way to save face.

While I'm on this topic, we need to build a way into the process where we are not notifying pilots 30 minutes prior to pickup for a flight that they're being investigated for a crime which could result in their termination. Before you say, "Call in sick," remember, they are at that point very unlikely to want to further risk their jobs by calling in sick in such a visible way.



That is our fundamental disagreement. You believe there is no way to bring pressure to bear on The Company to influence their behavior, and I believe there is. I believe that defeatest attitude is cultivated in our monthly SIG process where the only way we can fix a problem for our pilots is to fix a problem FOR THE COMPANY. Unless we can find a solution which costs The Company no more money than what their computer program spit out, all we can do is label a pairing as disputed, and move on. After all, we have to publish a Bid Period Package, and we have a deadline. At some point, on a given day at a given time, we have to say, "There's nothing else we can do," and we move on, accepting the best we were able to get. We don't have the luxury of digging our heels in, drawing a line in the sand, or standing up for what we demand.

That mentality, the interest-based bargaining, if you will (I'll fix my problem by solving your problem) doesn't work the same in other environments, like dealing with hostages, or negotiating a CBA. If we take that same defeatest attitude into those settings, we will come up short. And that's exactly what I believe we're doing today.



It would be inappropriate to share personal details, but I can tell you that the 1 who settled did not do so because of the risk of failure. He, due to those personal reasons, could not afford a gap in income or health care insurance. He did the right thing for his family, and he deserves to be made whole, just like the four who have rejected the settlement offers.



Actually, he doesn't have the luxury of speaking for himself any more than a Block Rep or a Negotiating Committee Chairman have the luxury of speaking for themselves. When you assume those positions, you take on a responsibility for every word spoken or written, because every word carries the weight of the position.

If the MEC isn't happy with what he's saying on their behalf, there is a mechanism to replace him. I was recently reminded that the MEC is a big group, and it works on the principle of democracy. Just because the majority of the MEC feels a certain way, that doesn't mean that all the members do. They all have their own avenues to communicate as well.


I like his enthusiasm and his positive attitude. The risk he's taking, though, is that the pilots' response to his appeals is easily measured. The Company is watching, and our response is a barometer letting them know how serious they need to be about negotiating. We ignore his pleas and demonstrate our independent contractor attitudes, they run Dean Smith's four corner offense. They start seeing lanyards and PAC participation, and they get serious at the table. You know the Negotiating Committee Chairman's position at the table is only as strong as the unity of the pilots behind him. Apathy does not serve us well.



As did you. Likewise.






.

kwri10s

I listened to the V.C. talking about this recently and while listening across the counter to the discussion I might have missed something. What he said was that HE would have taken any offer just to keep his job. In fact he made a point of saying that he would do whatever he had to in order to keep his job. He was not recommending anyone else follow his advice he was just giving it. He said he did not know what the pilots were offered in the settlement, but he would still sign whatever the settlement he was offered. I thought that sounded odd but he said the same thing twice. He'd agree to whatever the company wanted him to sign as long as he could keep his job. Of course the conversation deteriorated into what if questions, but bottom line according to what; he said he does not know what the pilots are being asked to sign but would recommend they sign it anyway. I cannot imagine the pilots are being asked to sign insignificant statements so without knowing what the proposals are I have no idea how he can recommend they should accept. It would really be nice to get more info from the union.

Gunter

PC has apparently moved upward and onward. Town Hall meetings were all the rage yesterday at the AOC.

Gunter

?????

Amazing point of view. If we pulled out of the process we'd have some real improvements in our schedules all right. You must do standbys or reserve.