Pierce backs the strategy in a letter to Moak
05-12-2012, 03:45 PM
#11
HOSED BY PBS AGAIN
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,713
If you don't display the intent to "negotiate in good faith" the way to the end, the NMB will not hesitate to park you or deny the request..
We all know it is mgt that is stalling but it's ALL politics in DC so you gotta play the game. Good luck getting a release 6 months before an election, we are all hoping UCAL hits a home run.
............
We all know it is mgt that is stalling but it's ALL politics in DC so you gotta play the game. Good luck getting a release 6 months before an election, we are all hoping UCAL hits a home run.
............
05-12-2012, 04:02 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 225
Don't need to be a "fricking genius" and don't need to be in the office. All you have to be is SMART ENOUGH to realize that the guy in office is not doing his job and getting rid of them. Did you even take the time to really read his letter?
Last edited by Once United; 05-12-2012 at 04:18 PM.
05-12-2012, 04:16 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 225
If you don't display the intent to "negotiate in good faith" the way to the end, the NMB will not hesitate to park you or deny the request..
We all know it is mgt that is stalling but it's ALL politics in DC so you gotta play the game. Good luck getting a release 6 months before an election, we are all hoping UCAL hits a home run.
BTW, where is that guy that was claiming that Moak wasn't going to support the release request? Tool.
We all know it is mgt that is stalling but it's ALL politics in DC so you gotta play the game. Good luck getting a release 6 months before an election, we are all hoping UCAL hits a home run.
BTW, where is that guy that was claiming that Moak wasn't going to support the release request? Tool.
05-12-2012, 05:25 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 467
what was the reason for the "make clear to the NMB our continued....." statement?
The letter was fine without the last paragraph.
What purpose did it serve? There MUST be a reason for it.
BTW, the CAL Ast. Chief Pilots have been telling line pilots that those items not agreed upon will be "parked" in a "parking lot" and those items will be going to arbitration. Could it be that the last paragraph lends credence to and supports the CPO tidbits they've been feeding us??
The letter was fine without the last paragraph.
What purpose did it serve? There MUST be a reason for it.
BTW, the CAL Ast. Chief Pilots have been telling line pilots that those items not agreed upon will be "parked" in a "parking lot" and those items will be going to arbitration. Could it be that the last paragraph lends credence to and supports the CPO tidbits they've been feeding us??
05-12-2012, 05:29 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 467
It is clear from the letter, that at least a majority of the CAL MEC felt that it was time to stop bouncing the ball.
However, the letter does not refelct the true sense of frustration of the MEC, nor the pilots. I would call it a rather tepid and timid appeal for ALPA National support for an NMB relase.
However, the letter does not refelct the true sense of frustration of the MEC, nor the pilots. I would call it a rather tepid and timid appeal for ALPA National support for an NMB relase.
05-12-2012, 06:43 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
"BTW, the CAL Ast. Chief Pilots have been telling line pilots that those items not agreed upon will be "parked" in a "parking lot" and those items will be going to arbitration."
If they are really saying such a thing then they should be removed from their positions. Why? Because they are ignorant of the negotiating process under the RLA, which is s sad state for one who claims to be in charge.
There will be no arbitration on the JCBA.
If they are really saying such a thing then they should be removed from their positions. Why? Because they are ignorant of the negotiating process under the RLA, which is s sad state for one who claims to be in charge.
There will be no arbitration on the JCBA.
05-12-2012, 06:49 PM
#17
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: IAH 737 CA
Posts: 690
what was the reason for the "make clear to the NMB our continued....." statement?
The letter was fine without the last paragraph.
What purpose did it serve? There MUST be a reason for it.
BTW, the CAL Ast. Chief Pilots have been telling line pilots that those items not agreed upon will be "parked" in a "parking lot" and those items will be going to arbitration. Could it be that the last paragraph lends credence to and supports the CPO tidbits they've been feeding us??
The letter was fine without the last paragraph.
What purpose did it serve? There MUST be a reason for it.
BTW, the CAL Ast. Chief Pilots have been telling line pilots that those items not agreed upon will be "parked" in a "parking lot" and those items will be going to arbitration. Could it be that the last paragraph lends credence to and supports the CPO tidbits they've been feeding us??
Is that the same 150 or so items mentioned on the company negotiations website?
05-12-2012, 07:11 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 467
I refuse to go to the company website. Shame on Pfred for doing that. What a bafoon. He wants to negotiate in public but he also want to prevent ALPA from doing the same.
Anyone who does Pfred's bidding deserves what he gets in the end.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
