Originally Posted by
awax
I was asking this question over the summer, and my conclusion is that this reaction to TA1 is all anger - no plan forward.
The anger crowd seems to believe that remove and replace will fix everything. And apparently, if you question the process or ask just who will replace this failed MEC, you get labeled as a “TA1 lover”. Are we in grade school?
In my opinion, the “grade school” mentality is this idea that you can’t make a present decision without having 100% assurance of what its future outcomes will be. Real life requires us to make choices based on our best assessment of the limited information we have available. This is particularly true in representative systems where we only control our own vote & ultimately have to abide by the sometimes contrary voice of the majority. Recalls trigger elections in which we will be tasked collectively with making informed & responsible choices. What’s so hard to understand about that?
Recalling reps is about holding them accountable for their failure to do their most fundamental duty- represent our interests to the company above all else. It takes them out of positions from which they’ve caused us harm & creates consistency of expectations for future reps. It also begins the hard work of electing their replacements & fixing systems of apathy in which we allowed this failure to occur. It is a long process & success is not guaranteed; but that alone isn’t sufficient reason to maintain the status quo. The recent question our pilots have had to ask themselves is whether that hard work & uncertainty is better than sticking with the “devil we know”. For the most part, the majority answer has been “yes”.