Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
I applaud our reps from NYC, MSP, DTW, the F/O rep from CVG and the training rep in ATL. Regardless of where you stood on the TA itself, the fact that you gentlemen pushed to have the pilots you represent decide such a comprehensive change to the PWA makes me very proud of you. The 11 reps who voted against having the pilots decide should be recalled immediately. Regardless of where you stood on the merits of the TA, you've failed in the most basic duty of being a rep.
Donatelli must be recalled immediately as well.
I urge the pilots of the LAX, SLC, SEA, CVG and ATL bases to make the rep changes
You've been trying to develop this point obliquely for a few pages, but you're failing to get any interest. It’s not because you’ve been too subtle. It’s. Because. No. One. Cares.
I don’t know if you realize this, but the group has gotten over the novelty of the merger. Everyone here is talking about the right lessons, the specifics, the mistakes not to be repeated
in order to move the group forward, and you're merely back on APC for merger politics.
Because you live in the past, you fail yet again. You've failed to convince on DPA, and you're going to fail to draw contrasts between "good" and "bad" councils. You're trying to use the "MEMRAT = good argument", but you're only going to embarrass the reps you're trying to glorify.
Everyone understands that the failure in this TA was to include CDO’s without polling or communicating. That’s the problem, and it’s a problem the MEC shares collectively. But let’s say you insist on drawing distinctions, let’s say you high-five “NYC, MSP, DTW, the F/O rep from CVG and the training rep in ATL”. That’s going to cause a few disturbing questions. If you want to insist on describing the performance of my reps, then I’d like to say that, for NYC pilots, your rhetoric on APC is going to raise a few pointed questions:
1) Why is it that “NYC, MSP, DTW, the F/O rep from CVG and the training rep in ATL” are so very, very consistently voting together?
2) How did NYC become so enamored with CDO’s, when we have very little experience with them, and probably would have never even thought to ask?
3) Why is it that we have two CA reps in NYC that (according to a PanAm pilot) go back to PanAm days, and are very close, but one NYC CA is the CA rep for DTW, and the other NYC CA is the CA rep for NYC? And they vote as if they were twins. Is that a good relationship, from NYC’s perspective?
4) How is it, that two guys who campaigned so heavily on communications, communications, and communications
never uttered a word about CDO’s, before they became a political liability?
5) How is it that the FO rep, who campaigned on his expertise on rotation construction, and his experience on the RCC,
never raised the alarm, or polled, or asked for feedback on CDO’s before they were thrown in our lap?
Until the great CDO riots of 2014, these guys cooked a meal in secret, and brought it to the table, ready to serve. We caught a whiff of a dish of steaming turds, and demanded they throw it away. Now you want us to promote the chefs who until recently were fine-tuning the turd gravy, and probably asked for turds to be put on the menu, for "letting" us vote on how we like the steak? Really?
It’s always a stupid move to interfere with other councils, as we all know. You're not just going to fail on this argument because you’re being a presumptuous asshat, telling us how to handle our representation. You’re going to fail yet again, not because have no point, but because you're obsessed with the politics of the past, and not the solutions of the future. We all want a functional MEC that produces solid results, and you’re just here to promote your peeps. You're failing all of us, badly, when you play these games.
Sorry about the colorful examples, and I hope you all can still enjoy your meal. Have a nice Memorial Day week-end, everyone. You too, Carl.