Originally Posted by Whalefr8

Same question to you. What are we in negotiations for? What are we "giving up" in those negotiations? What is the union stance? Have they really given anything up? Did we lose money or hours? Did the time away from home increase? It takes two parties to negotiate.

The union leadership can blab all it wants but unless the company is blabbing back the negotiation is not taking place.

If there are LOAs that have done NOTHING for the group as a whole then why were they voted in? An LOA still gets a vote by the crewmembers right? It is the union leaders attempt to engage the crewmembers. A NO vote actually gives the leaders the power to go back to the company and ask for more. Your mention of an LOA that does nothing points the finger at the crewmembers, not the leadership or LOA negotiators.

Or perhaps you do not understand the process? As crewmembers we empower the leadership by voting no on an LOA or a CBA TA!

During every roadshow for our previous CBAs I asked the negotiators and MEC members "are you voting for this LOA?" Surprisingly their answer was often no. I voted likewise.

Part of negotiation is public support for what you have negotiated. It is a tactic to get more from the company 'Well Mr Cato - we will come out an support this LOA or TA this CBA if you give us a few more dollars an hour" all the while knowing (or hoping) that the crewmembers vote it down. It is a TACTIC, not a position. As crewmembers we need to be smarter than this. we need to understand the process and our role in the process. Your comment on the LOA shows that perhaps you do not understand that.