Originally Posted by
Wildmanny
Good on you MEC for coming out and finally putting your foot down saying you'll no longer support "sweeteners" to the LOA! (Sarcasm noted).
I've tried to be as positive as I can be and find something good to say about the situation. That's the best I can do.
Now for the negative: What a joke they are beginning to look like.
Fix: Scrap the whole thing. Pull the LOA, postpone the bid, redo the whole enchilada. Oh yeah, listen to the crewforce and see what they want, instead of telling us what we should want.
WM
The truth of the matter is probably discouraging. In the past few years, I hear our leadership talk about how what we do "impresses" ALPA National....from our membership percentage, our resolve, our (former) unity, our "Leadership" on the Age 60 issue....our dues, our Block structure,etc....How "ALPA NATIONAL was impressed with our improved scope with the LOA"....ad nauseum.
I always thought it funny how we try to "impress" "National" as if "National" is some sort of Holy Grail that is to be spoken about in reverence. Even our comm chair is in need of help because of "tasking by 'National'". That's the kind of BS that existed in the Air Force. The Bureacratic Holy Grail wagging the dog. Our leaders spend time in the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel of flight meals, conferences etc.
More likely, somewhere along the line, while the membership's weeping and gnashing of teeth was muted (looking like a television with the sound turned down)....someone at National suggested that it wouldn't help FDX ALPA be a "Flagship Member" if we were allowing unilateral management changes to the CBA at the same time ALPA was in court challenging the same exact assaults to the RLA at other ALPA carriers.
"OOPS!....Guess we better get right on that"