Letter to Council 5 Reps
12-07-2015, 04:26 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
There is a system in place to handle agreements like this. Those, the mec, who administer the process were elected by us. Where was the outcry to six months ago to bypass the mec and send agreements straight to the membership for ratification? If we don't like the process or members, then change it. To protest against it at this point in time gives the appearance that one is trying to sway the outcome for their own beliefs.
12-07-2015, 04:30 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
I agree with you. I hope that it ends up going out for MR if for no other reason than the usual reason an MEC might keep it from MR is to "send it back" to be fixed and re-submitted. As that isn't one of the options on the table during this negotiation, it should be left to the majority to decide in my opinion.
The one thing that upsets me about our MEC is that I think many time politics influence the votes more than the direction of the membership. It's disheartening for the average line pilot when you hear one council doesn't agree with another and we all KNOW that there are sore feelings from this election or that election etc. I hope the MEC can put all that to the wood shed and just do what's best for the pilots they represent..... whatever that is
The one thing that upsets me about our MEC is that I think many time politics influence the votes more than the direction of the membership. It's disheartening for the average line pilot when you hear one council doesn't agree with another and we all KNOW that there are sore feelings from this election or that election etc. I hope the MEC can put all that to the wood shed and just do what's best for the pilots they represent..... whatever that is
12-07-2015, 04:35 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Industry leading is a catchy sound bite that speaks to success. Not leaving money on the table when attached to industry leading is the cure for buyers remorse. Does the pilot group have enough information at this moment to intelligently say we are not leaving money on the table?
12-07-2015, 04:59 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2015
Position: B777 CA
Posts: 760
12-07-2015, 05:20 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Yes, elected representatives. Every vote on whether to send this out to the pilots will be case by representatives elected by the line pilots who bothered to vote. The percentage of pilots who do so usually ranges from 20-45%.
12-07-2015, 05:37 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
I hope that it ends up going out for MR if for no other reason than the usual reason an MEC might keep it from MR is to "send it back" to be fixed and re-submitted. As that isn't one of the options on the table during this negotiation, it should be left to the majority to decide in my opinion.
12-07-2015, 05:40 AM
#18
(retired)
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Position: Old, retired, healthy, debt-free, liquid
Posts: 422
Discussions among MEC members to allow a membership vote on an agreement center less upon quality of the agreement and more upon the perception of which (right/wrong) way the membership is going to vote and personal preference...just my humble opinion of course.
I was a two-time rep about 20 years ago. Almost all these types of meetings are done in executive session, so there is no public transcript. Initially there are great pronunciations from various reps about "doing the will of the membership." They invariably devolve into discussions about which way the membership is going to vote and whether the agreement benefits certain reps when they're out flying the line and not bloviating in a meeting.
Some reps are actually afraid to let an agreement go to the membership because they perceive their constituents as being at "odds" with their personal contractual beliefs...it has very little to do with "quality."
No stake in it. Still interesting to watch. Good luck.
I was a two-time rep about 20 years ago. Almost all these types of meetings are done in executive session, so there is no public transcript. Initially there are great pronunciations from various reps about "doing the will of the membership." They invariably devolve into discussions about which way the membership is going to vote and whether the agreement benefits certain reps when they're out flying the line and not bloviating in a meeting.
Some reps are actually afraid to let an agreement go to the membership because they perceive their constituents as being at "odds" with their personal contractual beliefs...it has very little to do with "quality."
No stake in it. Still interesting to watch. Good luck.
12-07-2015, 05:49 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
In this case this MEC made a principled stand to reject the FDP extension LOA that would have given away much of the leverage used to get this AIP for nothing in return. A few weaker reps needed to be persuaded to make it unanimous. Such is the human nature of any political body.
12-07-2015, 06:16 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 215
A better letter to your Reps!!!!
The letter below was sent to the C#5 Reps. You may or may not have seen it. I totally disagree with their sentiment on this issue.
Only you gentlemen have the total knowledge of the leverage we might be giving up with this extension. Our current contract has much that needs fixed and was voted on out of fear of whipsawing the two pilot groups. You also know that unfortunately most pilots only look at the pay rates when evaluating a contract. Unfortunately that is how they will vote as well.
As my elected Reps I expect that you will look at the TA and evaluate the merits within and balance the leverage given up to get the Extension TA. I implore you to not fall into the trap that many fall into as elected reps. I call it the “Pontious Pilate (pilot) mentality” where the Reps just wash their hands of their responsibilities and “let the pilots decide.” You will most certainly hear those exact words in the debate to approve or disapprove of the Extension TA.
Do the evaluation on the merits of the TA alone and if it doesn’t balance in the pilot’s favor, do not waste the leverage we will be giving up! That leverage might be used to fix the entire agreement warts and all.
The letter below was sent to the C#5 Reps. You may or may not have seen it. I totally disagree with their sentiment on this issue.
Only you gentlemen have the total knowledge of the leverage we might be giving up with this extension. Our current contract has much that needs fixed and was voted on out of fear of whipsawing the two pilot groups. You also know that unfortunately most pilots only look at the pay rates when evaluating a contract. Unfortunately that is how they will vote as well.
As my elected Reps I expect that you will look at the TA and evaluate the merits within and balance the leverage given up to get the Extension TA. I implore you to not fall into the trap that many fall into as elected reps. I call it the “Pontious Pilate (pilot) mentality” where the Reps just wash their hands of their responsibilities and “let the pilots decide.” You will most certainly hear those exact words in the debate to approve or disapprove of the Extension TA.
Do the evaluation on the merits of the TA alone and if it doesn’t balance in the pilot’s favor, do not waste the leverage we will be giving up! That leverage might be used to fix the entire agreement warts and all.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
