End of Alpa said "Hope you're ready for more lawsuits. The path travelled so far is DOH with c&r. So if you attempt to replace the CLT reps with those that adhere to you're constructs that violate the C&B be prepared for more lawsuits. The DOH provision HAS been defended and won."
FUD ALERT! The CLT recall has NOTHING to do with DOH or it constructs. NOTHING. Same BS McKee used in his campaign, make the other guy look like he is against DOH. He lost.
Greeter
Lets stick to the facts.
I was responding to A320 who wants to change from DOH. He supports the recall effort, I believe.
REREAD HIS POST.
You: Following the election for our new Union President, Bill McKee file a complaint with the Labor Department alleging Gary Hummel violated many of the election rules established under the LMRDA Act.
Me: So? Everyone has that right if they choose. I would not have done it but I didn't run his campaign and I wasn't even asked. But the law allows for it and it IS a cost of doing business as a union.
You: USAPA was founded on the principal it was to be a 'Line Pilot Up' Union with the assurance we would all get a say/vote in the direction of the Union and matters affecting our future
This requires the line pilot to be educated in matters relating to the pilot group with objective and balanced information from our Representatives. Our current Reps have demonstrated a lack of leadership by consistently failing in this very basic of requirements, as most recently demonstrated by their actions regarding the MOU. In the last base meeting they were already talking down the MOU before it had even been released and made the statement they would not release it for a vote unless it met their minimum criteria. An outcry from the line pilots at the meeting caused them to change their position regarding the vote. The subsequent Domicile Update was full of rhetoric but very little factual information. What facts were included were disingenuous at best and aimed to support their dislike for the document rather than educate the line pilots on the purpose of having an MOU, what it contained, both good and bad, and why they felt they could not support it.
Regardless of the final outcome of the MOU, as this pilot group faces what may be one of the most significant events in their career, we no longer trust the judgement of our Reps to protect our best interests, in light of their past and current actions and behavior, to objectively and transparently educate and communicate with the line pilot to help them in making an informed decision.
Me: I read the MOU that the union posted and they had the meeting. They vetted the issues and in fact they are entitled to their opinions as well. Leadership means informing, which they did in the meeting, they bantered back and forth pros and cons and it was going to be sent out with a no recommendation, per the C&B.
BTW, it's up to the line pilot to engage and inform themselves as well. Two way street. They've always tried to do that but because you want more of what's not there to get you what to change the reps.
You: What happens if the recall is successful?
If all three reps are recalled the President will appoint a DDR *
If the Domicile Chairman is recalled the President will appoint a DDR *
If one of the Vice Chairmen are recalled the Domicile Chairman will appoint a replacement
* This is to be confirmed by Legal per Rob Streble
Me: ANARCHY. Lets let rob and Gary strip you of your voting rights, just like ALPA.
You: "Their confidence in winning LOA 93"
Me: They expressed the opinion that we put on a very good argument in the grievance proceedings. But they DIDN'T say we'd win. NEVER! Same with the 3 percent. Same. Ciabattoni had a problem with Kasher and told him so. It wasn't Dave's fault or the reps fault. It's LOA 93 fault. Besides, that confidence wasn't parroted more by the contacts I had than the reps.
You: Their support of the Status Quo filing in NY which was subsequently dismissed.
Me: So? Everyone here knows the company was delaying then as they do now. Why? Because they knew the possibility of a merger existed and they needed to divide and conquer. Any surprise there?
You: safety culture....
Me: now here is one point I partially agree with you. However, ultimately, don't you think all of this stuff leads ultimately down the trail of safety? Unhappy, angry employees on both East and West, go to work, do your job, no pride in their work for many, frustration.....you name it. Isn't all of that streams that lead to the river of safety?
You: Lobbying hard to hire Roland Wilder and his team of professional negotiators yet ignoring their advice when they don’t like what they hear.
Me: Roland is advocating a contract solution over a seniority solution and this is CONTRARY to what ALL the pilots here want. He is THE one single issue all of us want settled. Roland negotiated a "memorandum of understanding" that would have become moot in any case because the APA negotiated a new contract and it looks like they'll be emerging from BK. their MOU and our MOU would've been trash in any case. You're in such a hurry to "get a contract" by eliminating the contract persons to "get something in writing"... A Faustian bargain at best.
The rest of your website lament is trivial and even the people proposing to run is inaccurate. You can pm me and I'll elaborate.
