Originally Posted by
Plane Ramrod
Let me put it this way. I don't see a lot of difference between professing to the membership that by-pass just isn't there while omitting to mention that it could VERY EASILY have been there; and another administration stating "if you vote no, we are in no-man's land" when they VERY EASILY could have included a contingency in the back to work agreement. Both incidents are examples of MEC deception by omission.
Thank you for reading this quick reply, now back to the Skybolt channel.
Who said anything about a back to work agreement?
Don't try to misdirect. You jumped into a discussion about DFW based pilots trying to get a place to vote in DFW and associated that situation from 2007 when two Reps tried to get a "council bypass".
I'd be happy to use quick replies, but complicated issues can't be dealt with with one short sentence.
Back to your assertion that a bypass could have "very easily been there".
You're just wrong.
Gaining "council bypass" would have required a MEC Policy Manual update, a MEC Meeting to vote the update in or out, and agreement among the MEC members to include the language. One of the reasons Spirit people still carry a grudge against the 109 Capt Rep was because he didn't back down. You may think that gaining bypass would have been easy, but he wasn't going to back down and give them something as long as they kept up a personal battle. They choose to fight their personal battles vs find a way to make peace and do their Council's business. It wasn't going to be "very easily been there" for the same reason that people still hate Law, he was tough to deal with and he wasn't going to give them anything. Right or wrong, that was the way it was.
Sorry to actually try to give full explanations of these issues, but no one is forcing anyone into logging in and reading. I'm sure that you can just put me on your ignore list if you'd like.
added. Don't worry, when I get over this respiratory virus, I'll leave you guys alone.