Look it is apparent you do not like Dave Webb. Fine that is your right, assumng you are a member. But much of what you posted is false or is not accurate.

. It is his manifest destiny to guide the ill informed into a better life. And for this he is paid very well. (max BLG plus max carryover every month.

False, he is on full trip pay loss Paid 98 straight credit hours per month just like the other 2 MEC officers. BTW you got to vote on this pay package in an LOA back when we were in the FPA or were you even hired then? This is very similiar to what ACPs get. Dave W and the other 2 MEC officers do not BID every month so they do not get, can't get carry over.

Let's review a few of the more recent examples of how we have been "guided."

CRAF LOA--against some LEC leadership guidance (some of which seemed very well thought out). DW sent out a letter stating that it was in all our best interest to pass this LOA and the wording and objectionable areas would all be addressed during the contract negotiations......Well, we have a new contract but no new Craf section.

It was an LOA, didn't the membership get to read it and didn't they get to vote on it? I'll assume you voted no?

ANC move LOA--a message stating that in the best interest of unity we should pass this, instead of asking for anything in return. This way our unity will show the company how behind the negotiators we are and that will pay off in a quicker negotiation and better terms for us.....didn't seem to work very well, either.

Again this was an LOA we all got to vote on it. You voted NO?It passed. And to say we got nothing in return is False. We get paid moves to/from ANC. We did not have that before the LOA now did we? While we might have gotten more, we did get something and gave up very little in return

Scope--We didn't even get a say in that BOHICA. Just a nice note informing us that it was in our best interests. That somehow us paying the company for the benefit we just negotiated was a good thing for us.

I'm not sure what you mean Scope language or The Scope Violation Payments from the Company.
I'll assume you mean the latter. While we did not technically get a say about the refund, it wasn't a surprise. The subject was on hot lines and emails well before there was a decision made. Many memebers including myself contacted our reps to find out the reasons for it.
We did get something for it. Ultimately we got The Veba Trust.
While it best benenfits the guys who have just retired or will be retiring soon, this contract does not expire and is valid until ammended. In other words the language is there and we will keep it, if the majority want it. If you want retiree healthcare, ensure you voice your opinions not to give this up during negotiations. Ultimately you had a say when you voted for the current contract. I'll assume you were one of the 7% who voted NO?


Now 60+. Somehow, ALPA national has decided that instead of fighting this safety issue like they should they are going to run over to the "winning" side and pretend they have always been there. There is NO WAY that having someone over 60 at the controls somehow enhances safety. If this was a safety enhancement then the safest plane would be one with three 60+ pilots. ALPA's position aside, our MEC is trying to get out in front of the issue, and again tell us what is best for us. Contrary to what the majority feel is right.

While I won't argue the safety issue, the Fact that President Bush and his administration already agreed to allow over 60 ICAO pilots to fly to/from the U.S. That is a done deal. They have approved open Skies with the EU. That is a done Deal. So Get over it. So now the Senate and Congress have to decide......It is safe to allow over 60 Foriegn Pilots to fly into/out of the U.S. but it is unsafe for over 60 American Pilots to fly. I think you see the problem and conflict of interest here.

60+ is probably the biggest single career changing event pilots nationally have faced since we allowed regional commuters airlines to fly "Jets" (RJs) to move passengers in the 70s. Over 60 flying certainly will have a bigger impact than the B or C scale did.

Again I won't disagree but what is your point? You have been told about the politics of the situation. Do you really think it isn't going to be a done deal?
Are you saying it is ALPA's fault that the change is coming?

Maybe you think CAPA would Better serve you position?The 3 biggest carriers in CAPA American, UPS and Southwest can't even agree on the basics.
APA is opposed to any change
SWAPA is pro AGE 65. That means SWA wants it.
IPA is Nuetral.......that means they haven't been opposing it, or supporting it.
but they haven't been fighting it. Their Current union President is over 60.


And is DAVE Webb somehow now responsible for RJ's in the industry too.



I understand you are angry, but you need to point your anger at where it belongs. an please PM me with your name so I can ensure you are on the next MEC election Ballot.