MtEverest

They made their bed now they need to lay in it. Several bad things come from letting them coast out their assignments:

1. They remain in office until March 2016. With a 30% petition we can get them out much sooner and go about the business of fighting for a decent contract. Letting them remain only increases the likelihood of more of the same. Don't think for a second they and Donatelli wouldn't try to sign a contract extension/side letters bypassing the will of the pilot group. They've already proven through their actions and forked tongue Delta pilots are not their top priority.

2. Regardless of whether they're nice guys or not, they failed to represent the desires of those they promised to represent. By most accounts they drank the Koolaid and caved on the values they used to believe in. We don't need sheeple representing us. Selling with lies and half truths (they knew better so quit trying to play like they didn't know what they were doing) they sealed their fate.

3. Letting guys off the hook with no repercussions sets a bad precedent. If we let them slide, guys thinking about carrying managements water in the future would feel OK betraying their constituents with plans for that management job later. A guy that has a "recall" stamped on his forehead is also less likely to get back into office and do more damage. They put personal political ambitions and a cushy lifestyle above the desires of their fellow pilots. They need to fly the line for the rest of their days.

4. One of the most telling items in the script thus far just happened. Within minutes (you can check the time stamp yourself) of the NO vote being confirmed they scheduled their next meeting all the way to late September . This is what a two bit *shyster does when he knows he's had, to buy more time.

I know you are friends. You can still BBQ with them. They just won't be your pilot representative going forward.

*Shyster /ˈʃaɪstər/ is a slang word for someone who acts in a disreputable, unethical, or unscrupulous way, especially in the practice of law, sometimes also politics or business.

gopher3

Too bad....Their motives were to fulfill their own individual agendas and they did not represent their pilots that elected them. Their lack of integrity is telling. Recall them back to the line and keep them out of union politics for the remainder of their careers.

RonRicco

The C44 reps had no problems asking an MEC Chairman to resign when it fit their needs.

The C44 Reps had no problem calling for a special meeting to recall an MEC Chairman when it fit their needs.

The C44 Reps had no problem using a roll call vote to recall the MEC Chairman when they did not have the senatorial votes to carry the day.

The appearance that C44 is playing political reindeer games with advance agendas etc to avoid giving the pilots the same options they desired, is about the most hypocritical double standard I have witnessed. (It true)

SFWB

When I have contacted my C44 reps, I always received replies from the chairman and the FO rep. The vice chair occasionally replies. I like that. I've received good advice from them. The Sec Treasurer has never bothered to reply. As a 320b, from Florida living in the land of opportunity (Tennessee) who doesn't want their jobs, I only wanted them to help make my great job better. However, they didn't. They went all in the wrong way. They don't think we can get better. I like DN. I like HC. I like DH. I still think RECALL.

notEnuf

Losing an election can be overcome, a recall can not. This is all about keeping their political futures alive. CVG (C108) is playing the same game now.

Scoop

So the 11 members who encouraged a Yes vote are off the hook for a plan B? If that is the case what purpose will they serve going forward - might as well resign and save the trouble of recalls.

Are you saying there whole plan was simply vote "Yes." No contingency plans at all? Seriously?

OBTW I think this is all covered in planning 101 if I am not mistaken.

Scoop

sailingfun

The question is who will replace them? Who would even want a job that requires so much more time and effort than flying the line?
The other issue is even if you seat a completely new MEC, chairman and negotiating committee will you get a changed result. The answer is likely no. If they are intelligent they will get briefed by experts on the RLA, NMB, labor law and view all the real contract costing data. The NMB chairman will most likely also address the new MEC on how their involvement would work and potential timelines. Given all that it's very likely that they will come to similar conclusions as the previous MEC. Reality sometimes sucks but it's still reality.
I think the company will be willing to come to the table and address some of the third rail issues where they overreached if we can get back in and do it quickly. If we want to start all over again then we are looking at a long drawn out process that history shows is impossible to win.

UGBSM

History does not show that it is impossible to "win" a good contract after the amendable date. Look no further than our own C2K.

What history shows is that it is the norm for contracts to be signed well after the amendable date. It is unusual, highly unusual, for a TA six months early. Now we know why. Because its a piece of crap. And we will not be starting all over. You can't erase history. The resolve shown by this group will be a part of any future negotiations.

But hey, if you are over age 62 you're darn right you want this thing to come back quickly. Take the money and run... I mean retire.

Sink r8

I was saying that the norganizers have been working at this a while. It sure was an impressive effort slaughtering the TA, but I hope there is something more tangible than a social media victory? Like, results?

The 11 aren't off the hook, not by a long shot. They'll have to deal with whatever political fall-out they get, but I'm more interested with results than anything else.

BobZ

And im most interested in acceptable results.