The real problem with the CAL MEC is their mindset of what was in Chairman Pierce's position report today..................."ALPA has received quite a few individual method disputes from pilots, but they can be grouped into approximately 10 categories. Following the meetings next week, we will be one step closer to helping put the rest of your money due you into your pocket. When the CAL MEC was working to decide on the best allocation methodology for the CAL pilots, I recall saying there are any number of methods that could be considered as fair. (REALLY.. any number)

Certtainly, the concept of fair can mean different things to different people. However, as the process has played out and I have reviewed the method disputes received, I think it is noteworthy that in most cases, the "most fair" way to distribute the money described by the pilot making the dispute inevitably results in him being advantaged, at the expense, very literally, of all other pilots.


That's the problem folks The MEC, instead of negotiating a one size fits all policy, went out and disregarded their own motion, and federal law and found a way to reward (advantage) some people at the expense of others. What is good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander.

Why would they use a 48 month look back unless their was some way to reward someone? Were the reps, who were on association leave of absence for the last 48 bid months considered to have "good months?"

How can a rep on association leave have 48 good months, and not a military member? What about someone on maternity leave, or disability, or other forms of leave? Why put in the 48 month restriction at all?

CAL MEC thinks if they comply with federal law, they are taking away from others who are not. So, instead of complying with the law, they just ignore it. They also ignore their own military laison committee and military guard members on the MEC. But, UAL MEC did not do what the CAL MEC did. I wonder why/why not?