Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
These letters to two of Capt Reps are worth reading:
Mike:
Thanks, 3 weeks later, for finally putting in writing your views. In an age of instant communications I find this to be irresponsible ...
I guess he missed Mike's communication to his Local Council from 2 weeks ago. So he publishes another on the day the vote opens, with still 3 weeks to go before the vote closes -- and that's irresponsible? Is this letter intended to persuade his Block Rep to change his mind, or is it a temper tantrum?
Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
First, where in your letter is the voice of the one member of our LEC who voted for the TA? You seem to be determined to use your position as the LEC chairman to present a single voice (your voice) when communicating information on this agreement to not just the entire council, but to the Block 11 pilots who elected you. It is a gross overstep of your position, if that is in fact how you view it.
All three Block Reps in Local Council 26 represent all the pilots in Local Council 26, not just the pilots in their respective blocks, and they each have equal access to communicating with all of those pilots as often as they see fit. That's how it works, Chris.
Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
Second, you have been strident in your support of Section 11's gains (at least to me), yet you do not even mention this fact in your letter -- and it is the Block 11 pilots that you represent FIRST. Your failure to address your block and support your stated position on Section 11 gains is irresponsible. There is not a single instructor, including yourself, who should not work to ensure this TA is approved.
I worked alongside Chris in the Gucci building and understand how Instructor issues are more important to instructors than they are to non-instructors. Nevertheless, this isn't a TA for Instructors, it's a TA for pilots, and it has more to it that Section 11. I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore all the other sections and vote to ratify the agreement based on any single section. We will be living under the totality of the deal for a long time.
Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
Third, your characterization of "What could happen next" is completely askew of reality regarding negotiations, the negotiations process, the current calendar, and the fate of hundreds of pilots whose retirement is impending and who, along with every other pilot at FedEx, stand to gain with this agreement.
Informational picketing, attending stockholders' meetings, media campaign, strike vote ... yeah, those are completely askew of reality. Well, at least they were under the previous MEC Chairman. It would be irresponsible for Mike to claim the path after rejecting this TA will be easy. It won't be. He accurately describes hardships and challenges we are likely to encounter, reflects on how we have met similar challenges in the past, and encourages us to stand up to meet them again. Not just for hundreds of pilots, but for thousands of pilots, now and to come.
Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
I ask that you retract this communication immediately ...
Because an argument that cannot be made on its merits can gain victory by suppressing the other side.
Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
... and allow the communications process to include opinions that are not only based in the reality of RLA negotiations but other members of the LEC.
Sincerely,
Chris
I have always held Chris in high regard, but his accusation that Mike is somehow supressing the voice of the other Block Rep in his Local Council is very disappointing. I know Derek, and while I don't agree with his position on this TA, I am absolutely positive that if he wants to speak, his voice will be heard.
I'm not going to slice and dice Chris' letter to Anita. I am proud of his commitment to the Subcommittee on which he served, and the product which they delivered. I only wish I could express the same pride in the other sections of this TA. We don't get to vote on individual sections -- it's an all or nothing deal. I'm sorry that this work will fall victim to the failures in other sections, and I empathize with the personal pain that must cause.
Originally Posted by
FLMD11CAPT
*Though I thought the allegory of the Go-Around that you used in your letter was barely clever, ...
Barely clever? Was the personal attack really necessary, Chris?
.