- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,146
- Reaction score
- 3,236
There are Republicans and Democrats. There is East and West.Unsubscribe | View in your web browser | Forward to a Friend
Voting With the West
I am sure that you have heard the accusations about me voting with the West. This opinion is promoted by Bill Glynn, a CLT based pilot whom I have never met. When I don’t vote the same as his CLT Representatives and, if the PHX Representatives vote the same way I do (by the way they vote after PHL), he always makes a point of bringing it to everyone’s attention. This is especially true if the CLT Reps. are not satisfied with a particular vote. It truly makes no difference what the issue is; it is the fact that I don’t fall in line with their thinking. It is not uncommon to have several pilots call me after reading the ”Glynn Spin” and after discussing the issue, they agree with me and my vote.
Just to review, we had an election for the USAPA Officers last Spring and Bill McKee, CLT, has never quite understood that Gary Hummel won. As a result the CLT line of thinking has been to go against President Hummel on just about everything he has tried to do. Since the new Officers have taken office, no windows have been broken, no computers have been reported stolen from the office (the security tapes showed no one stealing a computer), and no one has had their email spoofed to send an email to our Attorneys. The fact is the Union is running like a business and we have four Officers that are working together to help facilitate this. By the way, the new USAPA headquarters is working out just fine and the BPR members enjoy easy transportation to and from the airport and the close proximity of hotels and restaurants to the office when we are in session. This Summer we have been in session a lot and the efficiency of the location has helped us do our work.
So as far as Bill Glynn saying I vote with the West, we ALL have on occasion. I have witnessed CLT vote with the West, DCA vote with the West and all of PHL vote with the West. There is one understandable area of disagreement with the West Pilots and on that issue we will continue to disagree. Glynn also spreads the rumor that Gary Hummel negotiated the MOU with Parker. This is an insult to the NAC and our Professional Negotiator who put in countless hours on our behalf in negotiating the MOU. Mr. Glynn practices politics of division and I rate his credibility right in line with those that support the theory that the U.S. Government took down the Twin Towers on 9/11.
Beware of those that are campaigning in this election with the support of Bill Glynn. He is not in support of pilot unity. He is a promoter of political infighting and the internal strife that have been completely counterproductive to our cause.
Fly on the Wall
Perhaps you have seen or heard about the email that has been circulating by a “Fly on the Wall”, or saw the Ted Reed article on how the BPR arrived at a unanimous vote in support of the MOU. Well before we give the CLT Representatives and two PHL Representatives too much credit, let’s look at the part of the story that was untold. On the night of January 2, after the first day of the meeting in which the MOU was passed, several East Representatives were talking and it was brought up by Pete Dugstead, DCA, that perhaps we could create leverage that we could trade with the UCC that they could use with AMR if we would provide a unanimous vote. Steve Crimi, CLT, said there was no way he was voting for the MOU. When asked for a reason why, he said that unless the minimum block protections were improved he would not support it. Paul DiOrio, who worked on the minimum block protections told him that there was no way the Company would agree to further improvements. So we left that night with no way to create additional leverage to be traded for improvements.
The next day, after the threat (they were threatening you not me) of using a roll call vote to block you from having a chance to vote, Steve conceded and agreed to provide a unanimous vote. He was told that if he wanted to get something he was going to have to give something in return. He did the right thing in the end but there is no way that five guys got the improvement on their own or even had the original idea of trading the unanimous vote for an improvement. Pat Szymanski drove it home to them that as mentioned the night before by Pete, it was going to take something to get something. The rest of us were willing to discuss it 24 hours earlier and were flatly rejected. Maybe we could have come up with more had they worked with us.
By the way, all of what I mentioned above happened outside of closed session except for what has already been released by others to Ted Reed and of course the Fly.
Seniority Aided by the MOU
It is O.K. to dream. Some among us are dreaming of a day when after the pilots reject the MOU the Company comes back to offer us a better deal or sweetens the pot. I hope that their dream comes true if the MOU is in fact rejected by the Pilot Group.
On the other hand, if it is rejected and they don’t come back, we will have to wait and see what the merger consist of and whether we feel COC is triggered. If we feel it is, we will pursue it through every avenue available to us.
The problem occurs when it drags on and we find ourselves not having a decision on COC and whether we get the snap back wages and we are involved in seniority integration. At that point, your dream could quickly turn into a nightmare that many seem to be discounting. It is this nightmare scenario that our Merger Counsel, Pat Szymanski warns us about.
With the MOU in place, we will all enter the McCaskill-Bond process on a level playing field considering compensation. If, instead we are still on LOA 93 wages, APA will put forward the argument that our career expectations are diminished due to our wages and that they are responsible for bringing our wages up to their level and therefore deserve higher placement on the combined seniority list.
To see how this could play out let’s compare our wages with the MOU 2014 rates that will be applicable to APA. Their 12 year Group 2 Captains will make $181 and F/O’s $123. Their year eight Group 4 F/O’s will make $145. From these rates it can be shown that all of their Group 2 Captains make more than any of our Captains. Our Group 3 Captains make roughly what an eight year Group 4 F/O makes at APA. Our Group 2 Captains make slightly more than a Group 2 F/O at APA.
I would look for the APA starting position based on career expectations to be a list that starts with all of their Captains followed by our Wide Body Captains integrated with their Wide Body F/O’s. Then our Group 2 Captains and their Group 2 F/O’s with all of our Group 2 F/O’s bringing up the rear.
In short, if we turn down the MOU and are not successful in winning the COC argument in a timely fashion it could spell “career over” for many of us. The dream has the potential to become a nightmare under this scenario.
The time to vote in this election and on the MOU is running out. Don’t take for granted that others will the job for you. Remember, if you have already voted you can change your vote right up until the polls close. If you choose to elect me as your Chairman, I will continue to represent you and your interests using common sense, logic and sound reasoning in decisions going forward in this process and others. I appreciate your support in this election and ask for your vote for PHL Chairman. If you have your VIN and PIN, to cast your ballot now, go tohttps://www.BallotPoint.com/USAPA or by phone 800-826-5530. For further reading I urge you to go to http://jamieweidner.com
Respectfully,
Jamie A. Weidner
Campaign messages are not union-endorsed or paid for with union funds.
Jamie Weidner | 26227 Seminary Road | Perrysburg, OH 43551 | (419) 350-3290
Then there are "independents". The only thing that differentiates the "independents" is they take a stand on nothing and the only way you can get an idea of how they represent their constituency is through their voting record.
In Jamie's case I find his voting interests lie more in pleasing the "leadership" than pleasing the constituency who voted him in in the first place: PHL pilots.
I really like Jamie, he was in my new hire class and he really is a good guy. His political leanings, however, seem to forget who put him in office in the first place.
I voted for Hummel personally because I thought that whether Steve or I got voted in, our membership through our BPR reps would rule the roost and the leadership would perform.
Boy, was I wrong. The CLT reps are in place and I hope the PHL pilots vote in DiOreo, Music and Daughtry. I know them all and I have no doubt those three will bring the sanity back into USAPA.
That's when I'll be submitting my name back into membership. I fully expect to get a 6-5 approval for membership.
