Originally Posted by
say that again
OK, I'll play nice. What difference would that make now? By that I mean what could we do now to reverse something that was agreed to over 20 years ago by a former administration? I understand your frustration over some EB's decision both past and present, that concern is shared by many union members at some time in their career. But heres the difference, that is our right, we are members of this union and you are not. You must understand that we get a little testy when an outsider attempts to influence the direction our elected leaders choose. [edit: delete potential flamebait]
My question as an IPA member albeit furloughed is how long will the IPA membership blindly follow BT and TK.
Can someone name anything good that has come from the current administration.
Before you jump on the Unity fund bandwagon I contend BT/TK have major ownership in the furlough MOU failing. Both gentlemen were against the MOU during the election campaign and were totally silent in the final weeks before the end of the sign up period. If the agreed upon amount had been reached it would have been much harder for UPS to have reneged on the MOU (my opinion).
I do agree with BT concerning the need to bring the FQS into the IPA but do not agree with the timing or the haphazard way it is being executed.
BT's off the cuff comments and statements have done much to damage his credibility with me,
1) furloughs wont happen.
2) IPA will file injunction to stop FQS MEF flying when first crewmember furloughed.
3) Furloughs will stop at 90
4) Furloughed crewmembers will be back by peak, (which year??)
5) Will have favorable POI's ruling on P3's by end of June
In the end I realize that UPS made the final decision to furlough me and the rest of the folks on the list but I believe things might have been different with someone else at the helm of the IPA.