I would agree. But, the individual who started it wants the right thing for the right reasons and is tired of TI's arrogance.

However, Perhaps the intent there is not "change" as we would typically believe or know it to be.

In my opinion it may be simply to heighten awareness and move the ball.

I have come to understand that as technology changes the ability to communicate rapidly changes as well.

It was not too long ago that a website was started in Houston called IAHrecallreps.com. At that time, a change was needed in the Houston Council. This website was started to circumvent the two IAH reps ability to control the information spectrum and shine the light into their crooked trip loss scandal. By countering one's control of the information realm, you can re-focus the discussion and pour sunshine into places that are otherwise dark.

While the change dot org website or petition may be unconventional, it is not anything new in union politics. It is really no different than bumper stickers, or bag tags, or flyers. It's just information warfare. The MEC can chose to engage, or not. They will likely ignore that website or petition. However, members in other councils will see the petition and they will likely start bringing resolutions to their local councils that were inspired by that message, etc.

When those in charge ignore the membership, they do so at their own peril. The arrogance of the MEC will likely be their undoing. The TA vote was not unanimous. That means there was disagreement. I see rats jumping off the ship at some point due to the lack of unity at the MEC.

While not unethical or illegal, their conduct is obtuse and insensitive. It doesn't inspire leadership nor loyalty.

many forums will shout you down for speaking to issues that may embarrass union bosses. They will censor you, or call you anti union. One way around that, is to simply start your own website. I have seen very strong unionists be banned from sites such as the facebook site. Sad really. Pilots should be free to dissent and disagree without being called anti union.

The essence of unionism is debate, disagree, and decide. The making of sausage in the MEC can be ugly. The act of unionism can also be ugly. Supporting a rep, or not supporting a rep or a position is a personal choice. One's opinion and ultimately their vote on an issue is also a personal choice.

The secretive executive sessions where the 3 D's have taken place do not inspire trust. The closeness of the vote means we have a very fractured union. The reps that changed their votes at the last minute and "lied" to their constituents have much explaining to do. Some of those reps may get recalled. Those recalls may extend further into the MEC. If reps get recalled that isn't "anti union" conduct. It's just democracy in action.

I am simply speculating as to what the future holds, but the petition will, in my opinion lead to bigger problems since I personally feel the MEC was out of touch with the rank and file. and this out of touch was the result of a failure to listen, and a failure to poll the pilots. The PDR system was being evidently used to set the standards of the LOA. This is what two reps told me. They feel you can get good enough PDR data to negotiate with and don't really need input other than that.

The pilots don't really know where the land mines are in this LOA yet. We will all see this thing explode upon us each and every month. Likely by next summer we'll know how much we truly lost and how much in particular the MEC owes to the senior two thirds.

That at the end of the day is what the MEC really needs to worry about next. How do they buy off the senior two thirds.... Votes are for sale. This is going to be interesting to watch.