Hey guys, I just returned from working 12 days with no computer access and found 149 emails in my account that were mostly about the upcoming elections.
I thought this response to Bott was necessary to post because the last thing posted on here was Bott's and it was kind of open ended.
Fellow co-workers,
I have just finished reading Bott's remarks about my work ethic, character, education, and experience.
Jeff implies to his reader's that after the three and a half so years that I spent serving on the APFA negotiating team, I would be unaware of the 'players' involved in negotiations.
After the months I spent in Kansas City, Dallas, White Plains, St. Louis, Orlando, Washington D.C, and even Miami at the whim of the National Mediation Board, American Airlines, the APFA leadership, dozens of attorneys, other union leaders and departments, and even spending hours with Norman Minetta, the National Transportation Chairperson himself,
could Jeff Bott really be suggesting that only Jeff Bott has a monopoly on understanding the intricacies of negotiating under the Railway Labor Act?
Only he possesses the wisdom and knowledge? Only he gets it?
Furthermore I have just read Bott's scathing reply to another co-worker, Rock Solaman, suggesting that again, Bott himself, has a monopoly on superior intellect and experience.
Let's back up!
Since he has suggested he has superior experience or intellect,
Can we begin to define it's parameters?
Since he was involved directly with the concession debacle of 2003 with that experience and knowledge, and keeping in mind that there are lawsuits pending constricting his answers, could he just be general with the following questions?
What were Jeff Bott's and the current Presidential candidate Glading and even Tommie Huto-Blake's demands, directions, leanings, testimony, feelings, or perhaps just any delivered speeches before the APFA Board of Directors concerning the following scenarios?
1. The Company demanding $340 million in concessions versus a smaller amount deemed more fair by other parties?
2. The need to shorten the constitutional dictated 30 day period of balloting?
3. The need to switch to electronic balloting from paper balloting and switching to a company managed by family of a serving AA Board of Director McNamara?
4. The desire to extend the Vote for an additional period until a different result could be counted?
5. At the time, were they serving under the constraints and quidelines of the constitution and policy manual of the APFA or were Bott and Glading and others breaking those constraints and dictating that the APFA Board of Directors perform other than the direction or guidance of the President of the APFA at the Time?
6. Did the ends justify the means?
7. Did the players involved take ownership of their actions, leadership, experience and superior intellect?
I would like to suggest something bizarre!
Perhaps it is time to have a leadership a little less 'experienced' at taking cuts while AA executives currently flourish on those cuts?
Might I suggest experience at getting whipped and the current Tommie-Glading status quo just doesn't do it for me?
Might I suggest it is time to reinstall a tree shaker?
And maybe this time not have any undermining?
This time might we suggest to AA maanagement that the APFA President and Nego team are the proper constitutional route for them to direct all requests thru during negotiations? No Jane Allen back doors via other departments?
Ironically, once a flight attendant reads past the smoke and mirrors, Bott is actually confirming my statement.
Outside of Bott's political party, no one would confirm his slander or attack my character or dedication. I have never shirked my responsibilities.
Despite the slander attempt, Bott. I stand by my previous email.
Bott is well aware why I stopped working for the union four years ago. I refuse to work under a political party that was the driving force behind agreeing to the amount of the concessions, shortening my vote, changing my vote to an electronic format that opened questions, and then extending the vote when the result needed changed.
I will also not be associated with the Tommie-Glading style of unionism that leaves the membership out of the loop and with no voice.
Also, as it has now been confirmed by Bott, Hodges (LGA) and Auregima (BOS) and many others...
The Glading support group and political party and agenda is the same as Tommie Huto-Blake. Their will be no difference. The players are all the same. The group that talks the talk, but cannot or simply chooses not to walk the walk.
When the group and political party of Tommie-Glading is in the spotlight or being questioned too closely, the result is always a tirade of anger, slander, and confusing plethora of half truths rather than plain reason and plain facts. It isn't always a 'rocket science' as Bott wants to suggest. Smoke screen emails from Glading supporters attacking other union members will not ultimately prevail when the great question still yet remains, what will Tommie-Glading now do for a different outcome than the last four years, Bott?
The focus and truth of my letter still yet remains.
Out of four candidates, I feel Glading is a completely unacceptable choice.
She is the least capable of reunifying the membership, restoring it's contract, and withstanding management's pressures. The status quo will not cut it. After three years of working right alongside Glading and seeing the choices she made, I feel I have earned the right to share my views and insights with this membership before a critical election.
I feel we must make a very loud statement. We must remove the political slate and leadership that has damaged our careers enough and kept the membership out of the process.
No more members allowed to vote, just tests.
No one dare question anything or you will be slandered, or it will be insinuated that you are unqualified or too inexperienced to have any relevant opinions.
No member dare criticize or they are against union unity.
Of course, though, understand that Glading-Tommie supports unity only when they are in charge.
I feel we can not afford more Tommie-Glading leadership working with management to keep the status quo.
We have had enough.
We can not tolerate much longer to continue working under contract that was raped of 32% of it's value by AA management, and yet even still leaves us further behind each year.
All while executives divide the contract cuts up into bonuses. Great turnaround plan!
Co-workers, we have come to a fork in the road. We must decide to vote for a tree-shaker, or keep the union status quo with Tommie-Glading.
Choose wisely, your careers and livelihood depends on it.
Arthur Cline
Former Negotiating Team Member
Former SJU Vice Chair
Long time member in good standing
