TonyC -

I tried to shorthand it so I didn't have to be long winded. I am glad you had fun with that, but I feel forced to expound on the "impression" phrase although I believe you and others are smart enough to know what I meant.

As the age 60 train was leaving the station, FDX ALPA pilots were being surveyed on what they believed should be done. (I am not going into every question - You and I argued over the way the answers were interpreted by the MEC on this forum and I assume we still do not agree.)
DW claimed to me that he hated that poll. He felt it would leave an unfortunate impression in our minds that the changing of the law could be stopped.
Prior to becoming law, the MEC and DW decided that they needed to represent all pilots seniority by adding the retro clause at the meeting of the executive council. DW submitted it was the "right thing to do" at a crew room meeting. He also told those assembled that he did not believe that it would actually pass.
So what is wrong? Well, that was actually a very divisive maneuver on his part. And THAT makes it poor leadership of a union. If he regretted the poll (and he said he did), he sure tried to make use of it in having FDX ALPA support ALPA in "shaping" the legislation. Come on TonyC. You remember. A strong majority were against any change, but if it was going to happen, they said the majority wanted some influence in the legislation.

BUT, obviously guys weren't planning on having that retro policy in shaping the legislation. Or were they sitting at home saying, "I don't want the rule to change, but if it is going to I sure hope I can move back 150 numbers before I get minimal seat progression!"

Then there was the FDA LOA. He was divisive, derogatory,and worse -- out of touch with the membership. Search the forum for the letter he wrote to the subic guy complaining about the LOA. Remember the guy he basically told to "get lost" and that the guy "wouldn't hold it anyway." Well, he was the number three FO and the base isn't filled. And as I heard someone point out, when he was rude to that guy, he was representing US. That was the MEC chairman talking - the guy who didn't know what he was talking about. He was so busy assuring us that he couldn't get a better deal, he didn't send BC back in there to try again. (And I know and so do you - so let's not be ridiculous - that you guys believe it was a negotiating failure.)

SO the "impression" I was referring to is the feeling in the crew force that DW is no longer an effective leader. And once that is the "impression" in a unity driven organization, it is sadly the reality. BUT YOU ALREADY KNEW THAT!