Originally Posted by
Sink r8
You're starting to get it!
If you want to start a thread about the previous MEC, go ahead. Maybe I'll participate, maybe I won't. I'm not their historian. Being a volunteer a few weeks doesn't require me to explain their actions in perpetuity. Team No won, and I've conceded that multiple times. As long as that leads to a better outcome, I'm quite OK with the whole thing.
If you are interested in the past, in the context of the original topic, I will say this:
I came back to APC with a thread about input, after lurking for rumors of a deal. I noticed that posters were actively, maybe even a little desperately, soliciting input to the reps. I noticed they weren't exactly asking for any input, but input that validates the prejudices of one small part of the bell-curve (the part that will never be happy with any deal).
After talking to a number of sources (including two of the 12), I came to realize there is a big disconnect between where people place the group, and where people on APC are trying to place the group. Then the reps started doing it: majority this, majority that, overwhelming majority, large majority, etc. It became obvious that there is a problem between the 19, over methodology. Essentially, I think the 7 are with the group this time, and the 12 are ignoring valid data, just because it doesn't fit their narrative. I'd be OK with that, if it didn't jeopardize a vote. There is a vote there that the pilots want, because there is clearly a deal between the company position and the top end of a reasonable negotiating range, that the pilots will want.
But maybe I'm wrong, and maybe they won't want it. I'm happy to be wrong again.
For every deal we've had, whatever website you followed was always "majority-against". I don't think I've ever seen a deal that wasn't an abomination online, so frankly, while everyone here wants to debate the specifics of the AIP's, I think they mean nothing without the rest of the TA, and the whole discussion means nothing to the outside world. I think many guys on these forums are terrified that they're not going to be right this time, are trying to lead opinion for a specific outcome.
In other words, guys that say they're the majority don't want the majority's will to be tested through a vote.
Get a deal done, let us vote. It's that simple.
Ok, the past union process was a good one, got it. Question, what's up with the last line of your post all but fading out? I'm sure we have a lot of young folks on this forum, but I can barely read that stuff! I love to try and keep up with your many posts, and the direction you go on many of them. I won't drag this post out, just refer to your last line above, the last one I can read. "In other words, guys that say the're the majority don't want the majority's will to be tested through a vote." Sink...seriously. Do you think the 12 vice the 7, the mathematical majority, want the majority's will to be tested, or the minority's? 12 is more than 7 where I went to school. If the 12 remain in the majority, they will only pass a vote onto the masses if it is a vote the masses are in favor of. What part of a democratic body of representation are you not getting? I didn't want to vote last year, and I was in the minority (11 to 8, even though the 11 didn't have the stones to vote, they just caved, and passed their job to the membership). The majority spoke out at the special MEC meeting, as they are doing today, tonight. Embrace the democratic body that is Alpa Sink, and enjoy Labor Day weekend!