Originally Posted by
acl65pilot
Like most things this there was a lot of opportunity here that was missed.
Speaking of missed opportunities, it's great to see a TA1 hard yes rep back on the forum. Remember when you indicated we'd never improve on TA1 if Delta pilots shot it down? Whooops.
So what's the occasion for your resurfacing on SM? It's certainly not a coincidence.
Trying to re-invent yourself, again?
Attempting to rehabilitate your track record of company appeasement?
Acting as the C81 chairman's SM spokesman?
Prepping for a certain MEC election in August?
Please do Delta pilots a favor and stay far away from union work. Especially the negotiating committee.
Here's some background about acl65pilot for folks who weren't around at the time. Here he is fawning over MEC Chairman Donatelli's election. Donatelli of the "PEB" rant during a TA1 road show.
New Delta MEC Chairman elected
And some feedback from a former constituent. There is plenty more on the forum.
We can't go back to the Moak "constructive appeasement" philosophy acl65pilot so conscientiously adopted during his previous union work.
Originally Posted by
mikea72580
David Nestor is very good at returning e-mails and phone calls. With regard to whether he will be a good representative, this is not a question that requires much contemplation.
David Nestor has previously served as First Officer Representative.
David Nestor has previously failed as First Officer Representative.
And in failing, he nearly permanently damaged our careers and the career of every future Delta pilot.
The job of a Representative during contract negotiations is simple, gather the sentiment of your constituency and then place a "representative" vote on the TA on behalf of your constituency.
David Nestor willfully and knowingly voted AGAINST the will of his constituency. Not on a vote for MEC Chairman, but rather on a collective agreement that would immediately and directly effect our careers.
Many have theorized why he would do that:
1) He thinks he's the smartest guy in the room.
2) He folded under the pressure of the chairman and other MEC members.
3) He was afraid that voting against the majority of the MEC would cost him future opportunities for ALPA work.
Choose either one or all of these and it should bring you to the conclusion that being a Representative is not David's strong suit. And I have personally shared these thoughts with David. I have also thanked him for his dedication to union work and encouraged him to pursue other opportunities at ALPA that might better suit his strengths.
There is no question that David puts in a lot of unpaid hours and genuinely cares about his fellow pilots. I for one am appreciative of his efforts. But at the same time, I will not vote to send a person with a failed record as Representative into that position.
David was nearly recalled by an apathetic pilot group and then blown out in the following election.
For whatever good David and his union leadership friends think he can do as a Representative, the very act of him running for and accepting this position will continue to build upon the untrustworthy and "top-down" reputation that ALPA has earned over the past few years. I am personally surprised that a person who is so "thoughtful and forward looking" could not understand the damage that him running will cause to the ALPA brand, especially in light of his very recent history as Representative. David has been very well taken care of by ALPA through is assignment to appointed positions. I hope he will reconsider the consequences of running for this position at this time.