Pncl fences
09-13-2011, 06:02 PM
#211
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: Up Front
Posts: 1,628
You can remain for 90 days from the election date. I don't have a moral issue with the guy (we've met and had plenty of great conversations) but it is a major conflict of interest in my opinion. If he is not a MEM based pilot, it's cut and dry. Last I heard he was running for MEC sec/treas for the overall MEC anyway (or so I was told by another rep). It looks awful shady to put an entire council into a base for representation AND have a guy in a voting spot in the MEC vote who isn't even based in the base he is representing and *could* be running for a MEC Officer position.
If we need to have an "instructor" council like some majors, fine. It will make sense when LOA 11 (I think that's the number) is negotiated (instructors) anyway. We could also use a NYC base for LGA (while it remains), JFK, and EWR. Representation restructuring will occur.
There is going to be heartburn over reps regardless (much like the Sli), but there needs to be a level of parity in the process. As it stands now many at 9E arent bothered by reps, but more bothered by the stance of being unable pick up extra flying.
Nobody should dictate how much we (as pilots) WANT to work other than the FAA (which is lobbied). The union's job should be to simply guard what the company can "impose".
If we need to have an "instructor" council like some majors, fine. It will make sense when LOA 11 (I think that's the number) is negotiated (instructors) anyway. We could also use a NYC base for LGA (while it remains), JFK, and EWR. Representation restructuring will occur.
There is going to be heartburn over reps regardless (much like the Sli), but there needs to be a level of parity in the process. As it stands now many at 9E arent bothered by reps, but more bothered by the stance of being unable pick up extra flying.
Nobody should dictate how much we (as pilots) WANT to work other than the FAA (which is lobbied). The union's job should be to simply guard what the company can "impose".
He was based in Memphis until the company decided to realign/displace.
These elections have been set up longer than the realignment/displacement notices.
Shady?
No way.
Last edited by Bartok; 09-13-2011 at 07:15 PM.
09-13-2011, 06:45 PM
#212
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
There is going to be heartburn over reps regardless (much like the Sli), but there needs to be a level of parity in the process. As it stands now many at 9E arent bothered by reps, but more bothered by the stance of being unable pick up extra flying.
Nobody should dictate how much we (as pilots) WANT to work other than the FAA (which is lobbied). The union's job should be to simply guard what the company can "impose".
Nobody should dictate how much we (as pilots) WANT to work other than the FAA (which is lobbied). The union's job should be to simply guard what the company can "impose".
09-13-2011, 06:46 PM
#213
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: Up Front
Posts: 1,628
You can remain for 90 days from the election date. I don't have a moral issue with the guy (we've met and had plenty of great conversations) but it is a major conflict of interest in my opinion. If he is not a MEM based pilot, it's cut and dry. Last I heard he was running for MEC sec/treas for the overall MEC anyway (or so I was told by another rep). It looks awful shady to put an entire council into a base for representation AND have a guy in a voting spot in the MEC vote who isn't even based in the base he is representing and *could* be running for a MEC Officer position.
If we need to have an "instructor" council like some majors, fine. It will make sense when LOA 11 (I think that's the number) is negotiated (instructors) anyway. We could also use a NYC base for LGA (while it remains), JFK, and EWR. Representation restructuring will occur.
There is going to be heartburn over reps regardless (much like the Sli), but there needs to be a level of parity in the process. As it stands now many at 9E arent bothered by reps, but more bothered by the stance of being unable pick up extra flying.
Nobody should dictate how much we (as pilots) WANT to work other than the FAA (which is lobbied). The union's job should be to simply guard what the company can "impose".
If we need to have an "instructor" council like some majors, fine. It will make sense when LOA 11 (I think that's the number) is negotiated (instructors) anyway. We could also use a NYC base for LGA (while it remains), JFK, and EWR. Representation restructuring will occur.
There is going to be heartburn over reps regardless (much like the Sli), but there needs to be a level of parity in the process. As it stands now many at 9E arent bothered by reps, but more bothered by the stance of being unable pick up extra flying.
Nobody should dictate how much we (as pilots) WANT to work other than the FAA (which is lobbied). The union's job should be to simply guard what the company can "impose".
"(2) A Local Council Representative or Officer shall hold office for the term elected to said office
provided he remains a member in good standing of that Local Council, or until recalled in accordance
with the Constitution and By-Laws, vacates the office for any other reason or until his successor is
elected and takes office pursuant to the provisions of this Article; provided, however, that when
newly elected representatives have assumed office, the Officer's term of office shall expire."
So the question becomes, when is he not in that local council anymore?
The vacancy award says the move date is Nov 1rst.
When is the MEC vote? That's all that matters anyway.
09-13-2011, 06:46 PM
#214
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
09-13-2011, 06:57 PM
#215
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,351
Please explain. The JCBA, that was membership ratified, lays out how many days of flying a pilot can pick up. What are you suggesting? Sometimes the job of a Union is to protect the membership from itself. In this case I wish they would have taken a more hardline stance but rumor I heard was that there was pushback from one of the pilot groups.
Not to get political but...
It's very socialist to prevent pilots from working extra. Why don't you want to make as much as possible with no one on furlough?
The union exists to protect me from the company, not me from me. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Funny thing how ALPA is making me lean left less and less every day.
Btw at a minimum it is REALLY stupid to prevent 4 days of pick up, since there are 4-day pairings.
09-13-2011, 07:31 PM
#217
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: CRJ 900 CA
Posts: 90
I'm sure there are other reps that post anonymously on public web boards, but since we do not know who they are, we take their statements with a grain of salt. Now for those reps that post openly, I think they should be VERY careful in mixing factual comments and statements with personal opinion. This mixing becomes misinformation, and can undermine the solidarity of the union, and disrupt both the direction and intent of the MEC. Unfortunately, this is very hard, if not impossible to do. Therefore, I do not believe reps should be able to post openly on public forums without MEC oversight of each and every comment. Even if they are no longer reps. Since there is still a back source of information through friendships. I understand some like the information stream, but maybe we can learn from Colgan in those respects, with their updates on social media sites and former MEC communications.
09-13-2011, 07:57 PM
#218
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Couch-Horizontal
Posts: 467
Not to get political but...
It's very socialist to prevent pilots from working extra. Why don't you want to make as much as possible with no one on furlough?
The union exists to protect me from the company, not me from me. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Funny thing how ALPA is making me lean left less and less every day.
Btw at a minimum it is REALLY stupid to prevent 4 days of pick up, since there are 4-day pairings.
It's very socialist to prevent pilots from working extra. Why don't you want to make as much as possible with no one on furlough?
The union exists to protect me from the company, not me from me. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Funny thing how ALPA is making me lean left less and less every day.
Btw at a minimum it is REALLY stupid to prevent 4 days of pick up, since there are 4-day pairings.
09-13-2011, 10:23 PM
#219
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
09-14-2011, 02:06 AM
#220
Day puke
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
Not to get political but...
It's very socialist to prevent pilots from working extra. Why don't you want to make as much as possible with no one on furlough?
The union exists to protect me from the company, not me from me. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Funny thing how ALPA is making me lean left less and less every day.
Btw at a minimum it is REALLY stupid to prevent 4 days of pick up, since there are 4-day pairings.
It's very socialist to prevent pilots from working extra. Why don't you want to make as much as possible with no one on furlough?
The union exists to protect me from the company, not me from me. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Funny thing how ALPA is making me lean left less and less every day.
Btw at a minimum it is REALLY stupid to prevent 4 days of pick up, since there are 4-day pairings.
Okay.
Consider this.....
Say my base has twenty pilots and ten are Captain Credithours whose goal is to fly 100.0 hours each month. As a result, the company bases staffing on an artificially high flight time per pilot ratio. One month, two of them are in recurrent and another pair take vacation. Guess what, suddenly we regular guys are getting extended and drafted like there is no tomorrow.
Or consider this....
My company staffing is based on pilots flying 95 hours per month. As a result, we only have four crews per aircraft. The company buys another airline that is staffed at five crews per aircraft. After the purchase, my company realizes it is understaffed, so it hires and upgrades. The two pilot groups are merged but only through arbitration. The arbitrator looks at the snap-shot numbers, sets captain quotas, and when all is said and done, my company is forced to flow back a bunch of recently upgraded captains.
Sound familiar?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
