Pncl fences
09-14-2011, 10:42 AM
#231
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 939
"we won't give in to something that benefits the whole pilot group unless you vote for this...." Nice.
According to your logic the Colgan MEC also has something to hide since they are mute on the "compromise"
09-14-2011, 10:48 AM
#232
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 38
that makes zero sense. Since you know it all why don't you tell us what Mesaba wanted us to vote yes to (compromise) that would change their 4 day "no" vote to a yes? If the Mesaba MEC did indeed do that, it is worse political posturing by the Mesaba MEC than all of Washington put together.....
"we won't give in to something that benefits the whole pilot group unless you vote for this...." Nice.
"we won't give in to something that benefits the whole pilot group unless you vote for this...." Nice.
Call your rep. See if they will own up to what they voted down.
09-14-2011, 10:53 AM
#233
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: CL-65 captain
Posts: 2,244
Were you even on property for TA1? there was NOTHING in there that required a compromise on any level....unless you argue that the whole TA was one big compromise in favor of the company...$2 raise after almost 6 years of no contract? what stellar gain/compromise did I get for that in TA 1? lets see....loss of vacation slide, no 401k increase, weak language....
Last edited by mooney; 09-14-2011 at 11:05 AM.
09-14-2011, 11:12 AM
#234
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 38
Our MEC/negotiating committee shouldn't compromise on ANYTHING on what is thought by many to have been one of the bottom of the barrel contracts in the industry, especially after all the stalling and games by management.....you don't sit at the table and say, "ok since you gave us 11 days off we will settle for no 401k match" You tell them what you want. And if the company doesn't like it, oh well....
We got put on ICE because we were not being reasonable. If we would have been playing nice, the NMB would have released us.
Like I said before, our MEC may tell us the truth, but they like to leave little bits and pieces out.
09-14-2011, 11:20 AM
#235
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Position: Up Front
Posts: 1,628
If I get you for OE mooney, drinks on me!
Last edited by Bartok; 09-14-2011 at 11:42 AM.
09-14-2011, 01:40 PM
#236
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 38
Our MEC/negotiating committee shouldn't compromise on ANYTHING on what is thought by many to have been one of the bottom of the barrel contracts in the industry, especially after all the stalling and games by management.....you don't sit at the table and say, "ok since you gave us 11 days off we will settle for no 401k match" You tell them what you want. And if the company doesn't like it, oh well....
Were you even on property for TA1? there was NOTHING in there that required a compromise on any level....unless you argue that the whole TA was one big compromise in favor of the company...$2 raise after almost 6 years of no contract? what stellar gain/compromise did I get for that in TA 1? lets see....loss of vacation slide, no 401k increase, weak language....
Were you even on property for TA1? there was NOTHING in there that required a compromise on any level....unless you argue that the whole TA was one big compromise in favor of the company...$2 raise after almost 6 years of no contract? what stellar gain/compromise did I get for that in TA 1? lets see....loss of vacation slide, no 401k increase, weak language....
I agree with you. TA1 was horrible. It should have never even been a TA. It should have never even been sent to the MEC for approval. The 9E MEC has been a failure for a very long time. The 9e MEC always has an excuse why it is not their fault and usually blame it on the company. I have worked for a lot of companies and while Pinnacle is not the great company ever, they are not as bad as our MEC demonizes them to be.
09-14-2011, 01:56 PM
#237
Property of Scheduling
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Bus driver
Posts: 2,573
I agree with you. TA1 was horrible. It should have never even been a TA. It should have never even been sent to the MEC for approval. The 9E MEC has been a failure for a very long time. The 9e MEC always has an excuse why it is not their fault and usually blame it on the company. I have worked for a lot of companies and while Pinnacle is not the great company ever, they are not as bad as our MEC demonizes them to be.
You are aware that the MEC that brought TA1 was not the same group that was involved in the JCBA right? There were some rough actions after the TA1 "situation".
09-14-2011, 02:06 PM
#238
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 38
I can stick a different name on a bull's behind......but its still the same thing and smells just the same.
After TA1, the "new MEC" as you put it got us put on ice. They did a whole lot better. If it were not for the purchase, we would still be without a contract.
As far as the JCBA goes, a large majority looks a lot like the XJ contract. Way to go, you can copy and paste.
09-14-2011, 04:04 PM
#239
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 593
I was presented with an oppurtunity to read the dialogue your union presented in regards to SLI, and I was dumbfounded as to some of the accusations and nomenclature they decided to bring forth to the negotiating table, hence why i feel the way i do...I dont like everything my union does, but we have the right people running the ship, and I'de like to see that carry on, whether it be 9E, XJ, or 9L reps for that matter...
09-14-2011, 04:12 PM
#240
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Ungh... I sign the log
Posts: 119
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
