Well, well, election season is upon us once again! Considering the latest propaganda out of Fern Valley Rd I'd say His Majesty thinks we all have a very short memory. You see once upon a time His Majesty petitioned the NMB that ACP's are not the same class and craft as us lowly freight dogs and therefore the IPA should be exempt from the Dorsey case. Fast forward to the '06 campaign. Low and behold, His Majesty arises from the ashes like a Phoenix and conjurs up visions of sugar plums in the eyes of his public by contradicting himself once again and promising to get rid of the "airline within an airline" and fix the ACP problem once and for all! Like a true politician, make a promise but get out of it for 2 1/2 years by presenting a poorly written proposal for a C&B change that he stated was necessary before proceeding with his campaign promise. Needless to say the proposal was written in such a way to ensure it didn't pass by the artificially high mandate he required. You have to admit, it was a clever way to blame the membership for failing to deliver on his campaign promise. Considering this is the eve of campaign '09, is there any question as to why this very issue is once again placed before us? The question this time is are we going to behave like schoolboys in a strip club by continually throwing our money or votes at someone who has no intention on delivering what we want? Come on guys, let's use our bigger head here and see what is really going on. Let's be realistic, if the C&B vote didn't pass last time without the threat of a furlough, what makes any of us think it has a snowballs chance in hell of passing this time with the very realistic threat of furloughs still in the air?
The upcoming C&B vote isn't about fixing the "airline within an airline" problem, instead it's about believing in the tooth fairy and the Pied Piper leading us to distraction until after the ballots are counted. It reminds me of the scene from Animal House where the marching band follows the leader into a dead end alley. Ask yourself one question, why would you want to further risk losing your seat or your job by letting His Majesty place an ACP on the seniority list ahead of you? Instead, why don't we protect what is ours by virtue of our scope claus. If UPS desires to have 1,000 highly paid clerks who happen to be flight qualified but excluded from flying the line, so be it. Protect OUR jobs, not the ACP's. Feel free to talk amongst yourselves.