Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
There was a merger committee election. Some didn't like the outcome and used their democratic tools to try to change it. Was that a conspiracy, was that underhanded, was that a steam roller? No, they exercised their rights. There may or may not be a negotiating committee election, I have absolutely no idea. I don't care. The MEC has their democratic rights to pick the people who work for them and there is nothing wrong with them exercising their rights. Whomever, the MEC picks, I will support their efforts to get us more money, more scope, more of everything. That is being part of a team.
I have supported the current negotiators in their efforts and will support the future team whether it changes or not. That is what real teamwork is about.
There seems to be some disarray in our team.
I thought that was the major reason people gave for opposing the DPA right now. We didn't want to have change and disarray so close to section 6 talks. But now were going to change negotiators and that's OK?
I agree that changing these committee members should normally be a routine matter and no big deal, but this seems different. This looks like some sort of "showdown" over direction and philosophy. Is that the case?
Would any insiders care to explain for us rank and file types what is really going on here?
Is this about scope? Do we have a hardline faction vs. a more "flexible" group on the MEC?
Maybe the line pilots would like to provide some input if this is a major turning point in our approach to the future.