Does It Only Bother Me......?

[StewGuy86]

Frankly I don't think either party has the average worker as their priority the difference is the Republicans are relatively open about it.

[post="292807"][/post]​

I gotta agree with ya there.

 

[diogenes]

I think your info is incorrect. . .she DID NOT disclose it to the MEC at the time.

[post="292774"][/post]​

What you or I think is immaterial. The facts, inconvenient as they are, are out there.

Let the MEC speak for themselves.

 

[diogenes]

I keep asking, and nobody wants to go there.

Does any of the current MEC/LEC involved in the coup against Teddy have long term ties to Crellin?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

 

[700UW]

I do believe the MEC member who is President of LEC 70 knows Mr Crellin extremely well.

 

[diogenes]

I do believe the MEC member who is President of LEC 70 knows Mr Crellin extremely well.

[post="292823"][/post]​

Going back to the PSA days, in a manner of speaking?

 

[songbirdstew]

Do you really believe there is a form?  Get real. . .another lie from those who want you to believe she did nothing wrong.

[post="292741"][/post]​

Actually, the information that there IS a form came straight out of AFA National Headquarters. Would the AFA attorney lie ?

In addition, I would like to know why Teri Graf did not go to professional standards about this. Isn't that what an F/A is supposed to do when she has a concern about something another F/A has done ....or are union officials exempt ?

 

[abonny]

Actually, the information that there IS a form came straight out of AFA National Headquarters. Would the AFA attorney lie ?

In addition, I would like to know why Teri Graf did not go to professional standards about this. Isn't that what an F/A is supposed to do when she has a concern about something another F/A has done ....or are union officials exempt ?

[post="292889"][/post]​

Although all should go through "Professional Standards" before ratting on a fellow employee, there is nothing that restricts a line employee from running and tattling to management. FYI, although this makes management very happy I believe that you will find that most of them have no respect for someone who elects to ‘rat’ rather than follow proper channels.

On the other hand, when an Officer of the Union, who is elected and paid to represent flight attendants, is both the initiator of the FA's problems as well as their representative then all kinds of lines have been crossed resulting in a HUGE, HUGE Conflict of Interest.

It is a HUGE Conflict of Interest when the same person causing an investigated/discipline/termination could also be the same person who is the representative for their defense.

This is what happens when the members vote an uninformed vote. To elect someone who has no problem applying for a management position at the same time they are running for or holding a union position is extremely unwise. When your elected representatives have openly demonstrated that they have no problem crossing that line at any time then you can count on seeing exactly what you are now seeing in PHL. BOTH the present LEC President and the LEC VP of PHL fit into the above category.

This also sends an open invitation to management as to who can be had, so to speak.

 

[longing4piedmont]

I do believe the MEC member who is President of LEC 70 knows Mr Crellin extremely well.

[post="292823"][/post]​

Are we talking "knows" in a biblical sense? :unsure:

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Ah, the plot thickens. What should scare everyone more is that there are people in the AFA MEC/LEC ranks with "extremely comfortable" relations with high management. No, we're not talking about a friendly hoisting of a brewsky on a Friday night or throwing a few shrimps on the barbie on the weekend. It's clear that the line between union and management has now become undefinable; like religion and politics this is not a good mix. It's one thing to have good relations, it's another to set out and set someone up. They targeted Teddy because she obviously was a threat to their "agenda". All US Airways F/A's need to realize this can only be to their detriment. You have to have somebody to fight for your rights. Sadly, that person was forced to resign because of some dirty tricks campaign. The reps of PHL, CLT and DCA have formed one very dangerous Bermuda Triangle that I can assure you has more victims on its hit list. One can only ask: When is the next letter from a confidential employee file going to faxed into their laps? What's worse, have the members of this "Bermuda Triangle" been set up? Are their egos so large and their ambitions so clouded that they themselves have not figured out that they are being used to destroy the union?

 

[PITbull]

Number 1: You assume that correspondence of that nature was in an employee's personnel file; highly unlikely. The letter was a "give me" and you don't know it was in her file, so why do you assume that it was?

Number 2: If this revelation had been about someone you do not support, I bet you wouldn't be so concerned about that individual's privacy.

You make it sound like any shady deal someone manages to get from managment should be a secret. Why? If it had not been made public, then a certain employee would have been granted a privilege that employee was not entitled to. Is that fair? Is that ok?

I don't think so. This isn't about a letter getting out. This is about an individual not responding appropriately to that letter.

Bottom line for me is that if you don't address a problem when it surfaces (back in April), then you end up suffering the consequences.

[post="292702"][/post]​

And I am sure, sweetie, you will have to give full disclosure , I am sure.

 

[longing4piedmont]

Are we talking "knows" in a biblical sense? :unsure:

[post="292979"][/post]​

Wow judging by posts and PM's, I seem to have hit a nerve. Relax all, it was an innocent question. It appears that MPA has a track record along the lines of another recently departed management member. Just trying to figure out the score card to form my own opinion.

Not to fear though. I'm not going try to sort out who did what to who and when. I'm going to leave that up to Doug and the DA.

Now I'm off to get ready for the harbor dinner cruise in the YVR harbor. It is a beautiful afternoon here and it is time to get out and enjoy the sunshine. Have a wonderful evening all........

 

[diogenes]

Let me clarify myself.

Certainly, a union leader must have a professional relationship with management. I have done so myself. But some managers will attempt to seduce you, and lead you to betray your office.

Has that happened in this case? Don't know, but it is in keeping with the Palace style.

Hence, the questions.

With full disclosure being the latest rage, and with major transitions ahead, and with a coup in hand, doesn't the membership deserve to know about any of their leaders' ties with management?

Has management attempted to interfer with internal union matters?

Has any union member aided and abetted?

If that is the case, it sure leads to the next question.

What ties do these folks have with one another?

Have they been previously disclosed?