Wendy's Video
10-05-2011, 05:25 PM
#12
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
I'm obviously in the camp that feels that a candidate that comes from one side or the other of a deeply divided and dysfunctional MEC is not an option. I want a MEC chair who can get a unanimous vote based on merit, not half the votes based on politics that hamstring all UA pilots.
Which candidate do you think that would be?
10-05-2011, 05:27 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Fero's
Posts: 472
Regardless of who the MEC Chairman is, we need to show a united front. Now is not the time for politics or internal gamesmanship.
We should all be pushing together, in the same direction, against only one common foe.
We should all be pushing together, in the same direction, against only one common foe.
10-05-2011, 05:54 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 281
??
As a former CAL guy, now a new United guy, can someone please post a condensed version of what is going on with the "politics"? What is it that these LEC/MEC members that don't back Wendy want? Is there a correlation to the 7 who wanted to explore "aggressive barganing then arbitration" (aka take my vote away)? Do they have an agenda for the JCBA, or is it that they just don't like the MEC chairwoman.
Thanks.
Thanks.
10-05-2011, 06:12 PM
#15
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
As a former CAL guy, now a new United guy, can someone please post a condensed version of what is going on with the "politics"? What is it that these LEC/MEC members that don't back Wendy want? Is there a correlation to the 7 who wanted to explore "aggressive barganing then arbitration" (aka take my vote away)? Do they have an agenda for the JCBA, or is it that they just don't like the MEC chairwoman.
10-05-2011, 06:13 PM
#16
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 81
Thanks for the recap!
10-05-2011, 06:47 PM
#18
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Just saw the video Wendy put out today. She deliberately avoided names, but made clear that certain individuals/MEC members are going out of their way to make her life miserable, even if it disrupts MEC Business and the Contract and SOC/SLI process. As such, she is not seeking re-election next term. She seems to believe the video itself will trigger a recall.
Question: can someone say who these persons are? If not appropriate for this forum, name a domicile? Or initials?
My fear: if what she says is true, then they fight only for the sake of fighting. I'm afraid these clowns will throw away scope, work rules, seniority, etc, as long as they get what they want.
At the moment, I don't have a dog in this fight. But I would hope that those who do would be able to shoot down a hostile bandit at the polling booth.
Question: can someone say who these persons are? If not appropriate for this forum, name a domicile? Or initials?
My fear: if what she says is true, then they fight only for the sake of fighting. I'm afraid these clowns will throw away scope, work rules, seniority, etc, as long as they get what they want.
At the moment, I don't have a dog in this fight. But I would hope that those who do would be able to shoot down a hostile bandit at the polling booth.
Well you have to realize you are only getting one side of the story.
You don't need to worry about these "clowns" giving up scope or work rules; their complaint with Wendy is that she's not being aggressive and militant enough, not that she is playing hardball.
For some reason I got an email from one of Wendy's supporters on the MEC. I don't know this person, and I don't pretend to have any inside scoop on what is going on behind the he said/she. However, I found several things that he said completely ridiculous and inaccurate. The one where he instantly lost all credibility in my eyes was when he proclaimed that it "made him smile with pride" when he saw both our MEC's steadfastly insisting on UAL work rules. Ummm.... Our work rules BLOW. They are bankruptcy rules. They might be more desirable than CAL's, but keeping them and getting no improvements should not bring a smile to ANYONE'S face.
10-05-2011, 07:02 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: B-777 left
Posts: 1,415
I've posted the link about 3 times in the last month, is that too much? Considering what's at stake for United Pilots, I don't think it's enough.
I'm obviously in the camp that feels that a candidate that comes from one side or the other of a deeply divided and dysfunctional MEC is not an option. I want a MEC chair who can get a unanimous vote based on merit, not half the votes based on politics that hamstring all UA pilots.
Which candidate do you think that would be?
I'm obviously in the camp that feels that a candidate that comes from one side or the other of a deeply divided and dysfunctional MEC is not an option. I want a MEC chair who can get a unanimous vote based on merit, not half the votes based on politics that hamstring all UA pilots.
Which candidate do you think that would be?
10-05-2011, 07:10 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Guppy Capt.
Posts: 1,887
Well you have to realize you are only getting one side of the story.
You don't need to worry about these "clowns" giving up scope or work rules; their complaint with Wendy is that she's not being aggressive and militant enough, not that she is playing hardball.
For some reason I got an email from one of Wendy's supporters on the MEC. I don't know this person, and I don't pretend to have any inside scoop on what is going on behind the he said/she. However, I found several things that he said completely ridiculous and inaccurate. The one where he instantly lost all credibility in my eyes was when he proclaimed that it "made him smile with pride" when he saw both our MEC's steadfastly insisting on UAL work rules. Ummm.... Our work rules BLOW. They are bankruptcy rules. They might be more desirable than CAL's, but keeping them and getting no improvements should not bring a smile to ANYONE'S face.
You don't need to worry about these "clowns" giving up scope or work rules; their complaint with Wendy is that she's not being aggressive and militant enough, not that she is playing hardball.
For some reason I got an email from one of Wendy's supporters on the MEC. I don't know this person, and I don't pretend to have any inside scoop on what is going on behind the he said/she. However, I found several things that he said completely ridiculous and inaccurate. The one where he instantly lost all credibility in my eyes was when he proclaimed that it "made him smile with pride" when he saw both our MEC's steadfastly insisting on UAL work rules. Ummm.... Our work rules BLOW. They are bankruptcy rules. They might be more desirable than CAL's, but keeping them and getting no improvements should not bring a smile to ANYONE'S face.
Well, don't know CAL's work rules, but I must admit UAL isn't the greatest. Being at NKS before coming over to UAL, was a bit of an adjustment as far as some of those, and the pay. BUT, NOT paying for medical benefits, LONG call, etc... wasn't "BAD".
I am more worried about SCOPE and PAY!!!
So he "smiled" at trying to keep UAL "Work" rules... what are some of the other things you found ridiculous and inaccurate? Maybe he was happy that the MEC didn't decide to lean towards the CALs work rules for "higher" wages...
Maybe you received the email because you're on the email list for ALPA, and they are trying to keep you "informed"?
Not taking sides, but trying to be neutral.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
