Albie -
First, thank you again for coming on APC and posting this type of response....it truly, is greatly appreciated by me....and my guess, by many others.
Now to a couple of your points...
Originally Posted by
Albief15
...The way (N) was explained was it was simply a recognition that there will be issues in a new domicle that pop up that can be tweaked between both parties without a lot of fanfare. The SIG, Hotel Committee, legal, and the other team do the same thing day to day. ...As Sean McDonald pointed out--to us privately and to his block publically...we ALREADY do this routinely and the intent is to not have to have an LOA every time a pick up point is moved or a hotel used for a STBY is changed. In that context...I agree.
I think you are "overselling" this --- if it's truly not needed, and in fact already being done, then why was it added?
If that's the case---the MEC and the company won't mind removing it.
Originally Posted by
Albief15
....If any of us on the MEC got wind the company wanted to make any changes that we thought we detrimental to the team, we would certainly want to address it as a group. There would not be a unilateral decision by the chairman (who will NOT be DW in less than a year BTW....so don't make this a DW issue...) unless it was a short "yeah...that would be good for the bros" deal. Anything negative would be brought back to the team to hash out....
Then why is the paragraph written in a manner that gives him unilateral authority to represent the union in this matter?
(Once again, if he already has that under some other ALPA provision/by-law --- why is it added?)
You're asking folks to "trust" whomever the MEC Chairman is to determine two things --- what issues are "big" vs "small", and which are "determintal" and which are "not".
As you know from last summers initial FDA LOA debates, there is much disagreement on both levels.
Originally Posted by Albief15,413185
...Now...the part that will irk the MEC leadership: I really couldn't care less if this passed or not.
Wow, I commend you again for coming on APC and stating this. Thank you again for your frank communication.
Originally Posted by Albief15,413185
...All I can say is that as long as I'm on the MEC I don't think any inputs will come down and steamroll you as a result of (N).
Thank you...but reps change for many reasons...the future is unknown on many levels...formal contracts/agreements shouldn't be written for specific personalities.
Originally Posted by Albief15,413185
..."We aren't going to sell this to you" is a mantra I have heard from several MEC members I respect.
Thank you....I look forward to NOT seeing a myriad of e-mails the last week the vote is open letting folks know they can "change" their vote.
Originally Posted by Albief15,413185
This LOA proably won't affect me for the next 3 years I'll be on the MEC directly.
Hopefully, you agree and tell folks --- the LOA affects EVERYONE...in the short run...and in the long run!
Originally Posted by Albief15,413185
Back to "how did I miss that?"...
OK, OK...you used your "freebie"...lesson learned.
Originally Posted by Albief15,413185
My focus since I came here has been on the next contract, mitigated the damage from age 60 changes, and trying to find a way to pull us back together as a group. Unfortunately, events have made keeping every dude on the property my newest number one priority.
Thank you again --- and while I fancy myself a "strategic thinker", I believe you are very astute in pointing out there are some very immediate threats that have both dire "tactical" and "strategic" implications --- and currently, those threats are bigger than the FDA LOA, part 2.
Thank you again for another outstanding post.
VR,
In Unity,
DLax