Originally Posted by
OnStep
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.
Onstep;
I agree with everything you stated. FWIW, the IPA's history has proven that blind faith tends to be a short term affliction. I don't think you'll find too many members that will disagree with your observations on the decision and methods used to organize the FQS. I've advocated keeping our powder dry until we have a clean head shot for a long time now, the "ready shoot, aim" logic of late only serves to weaken the association. Look at what happened over at the APA with Lloyd Hill and his gang. Unless we learn from history we're condemned to repeat it.
On the flip side,
Tough talk get's elected time and time again. In defense of our current administration, once the first IPA member was furloughed, the IPA had no choice but to seek an answer to the FQS issue. They really had no choice. They are seeking to change 20 plus years of history with limited resources do do so. While there may have been smarter choices, remember that hindsight is always 20/20 and it's easy for those of us without the burden of representing the membership to pass judgement.