Gator570

The UALMEC told Pierce long ago that they would stand with the CALMEC (and pilots) on every single issue that they desired. Unlike Pierce, they were sincere. They meant it.

So in answer to your question, 100%.

757Driver

I recall several safety lawsuits filed without ever consulting the CAL MEC. What would you say about that and the way they were handled?

Gator570

I understand that in 99% of the cases where the UALMEC had issues with safety, such as fixed base simulators, doing wing ice checks, and numerous others, Pierce told the UALMEC to bug off. He would not take a stand with them. On almost every issue Pierce took exactly the same position as management. The UALMEC found that odd. This was the case in examples that were purely financially driven, such as the FBS matter. There is no logical explanation for this. A union is supposed to act as a safety advocate, not a mouthpiece for the company. Ideally the two sides will stake out their positions and meet in the middle. With Pierce acting as an advocate for management's positions it became 2 against 1. CAL Management & CALMEC (Pierce/Marotta) versus the UALMEC

Pierce told the MEC that he did not have any issues with the way that his pilots were being trained. Based on all of this and more, the UALMEC lost confidence and trust in Pierce and desired to maintain strict operational security on the lawsuit. The fact is that the UALMEC didn't include Pierce due to a long history of his saying that he'd help and then bailing. There were also concerns over information being leaked to the company from Pierce's team.

It would be inappropriate and inaccurate to base judgement on the UALMEC's actions for filing and engaging in the lawsuit without Pierce. This was an event at the end of a long series of events in which Pierce made it clear he was interested in going it alone through his actions.

Pierce further confirmed the UALMEC's suspicions when in court the company's attorney made the statement that the CALMEC made it clear to them that they had no problems with the training, and that the CAL pilots do not stand with the United pilots on the matters of safety/training issues.

757Driver

That's your take on it and you've explained it pretty well but you don't see a bunch of CAL people starting a lynch mob and demanding change with your MEC do you?

We get it, Pierce did something that I don't approve of and the UAL types, (rightfully so), didn't like it. Let us handle it and we'll be just fine. Jay's not the devil incarnate despite whats being said on here.

reCALcitrant

I'll have to agree with 757Driver on this one. Pretty good point. Jay at this point is still responsible to the CAL side of the house. That doesn't make his interest mutually exclusive to the UAL pilots, but he has to lean to our interest. If we don't like his actions, we'll get rid of him. I've read quite a few posts over the last few weeks on this. I've noticed the most extreme come from a few with about 20 posts total.

I've seen the reasonable UAL guys and CAL guys. You can go back and look at past posts. I would love a 50% pay raise, but rational heads say we won't get it. BTW, we won't. We will, however, meet with management somewhere on our side of the middle. Just like every contract in good fiscal years.

Regularguy

Dexim:

I'm a LUAL guy for a very long time, been through a strike, good times, a BK, good MEC Chairs, many mediocre ones and a very bad one (Ferg), and have learned one thing; some things have to be let go.

You have got to let go of this Pierce mood because it will do only one thing, ruin your life. I have made my self clear about Pierce, he is a self interested, power hungry, messiah complex guy like John Ferg was. I also know I will survive him and my life goes on.

reCALcitrant

I'm not going down, so to speak. Sounds like you've already resigned to the fact that you are. If you'd read through the posts, you'd know I have been on mil leave for 2-3 years. Ever since our furloughs started at CAL. I did this to help keep a fellow pilots on property that don't have the mil option and to further serve the country. I have since moved to another city and will have to move back afterwards. Therefore, as you can clearly see, I am willing to take steps to secure my future (as well as junior to me CAL pilots), and have acted on them. I suggest everyone have some sort of a back up plan. I promise you, we are willing to fight.

Again as so many have stated to you Dex, JP is our issue, not yours. If we want him gone, it will be our decision. You don't have a vote.

Talking repeatedly about it on this forum will not make it so. There is no "my reality". There is just reality. The reality is CAL guys will make this decision.

In our future, I see a big contract (not perfect though) with a relative seniority combined list. These are my predictions. Feel free to quote me later. If I'm wrong, I'll readily admit it.

Until then, let's concentrate on management as the adversary and quit talking trash on the board.

I've seen your 100 posts. All of them on JP. Welcome to the forum. Maybe we could discuss how JCBA is going.

GarryKravit

If you don't start paying attention to what your representatives are doing then it is going to hurt you. Period.

Garry

GarryKravit

Would you like to know what REALLY happened between these MECs?

Stay tuned....

Garry

GarryKravit

United is canceling leaves of absence for pilots and forcing them to return. The airline is spooling up a new hire department. Retirements are about to begin. The summer is just around the corner.

So tell me again what value a 12 month no-furlough clause has?

Garry