Originally Posted by
Kellwolf
Once again, we've heard this before. When I was hired at Pinnacle, I was told by both the company and the union "progress is being made, and we are close." Fast forward several years, and the TA presented to the pilot group was crap, yet it was told "this is the best we can get." We voted it down. Fast forward another year, and it's like groundhog day "We're close and making progress." Unless sections are closed, "progress" is about like running 3/4 of a marathon and sitting down. Sure, you're closer than when you started, but you're not there yet. Are we any closer now than we were on Wednesday? Nope. All of our momentum was on Wednesday, and I'm not all that impressed with the sections closed. All the BIG sections still remain open. Get Section 25 closed (which is where the company like to screw people over the most), and then I'll start to get excited. If picketing was canceled just because airlines were "making progress," there would never be any picketing events.
I'm with you there, but I feel like a broken record whenever I try to explain the "whys" of the picketing events. It's not to derail the JCBA, it's to put pressure on management to actually follow through, something they historically have been VERY poor at. We probably should have had picketing events all through the summer, but I guess we were "close and making progress" the whole time. After all, the same sections left in the JCBA are the same ones we've been trying to close since the beginning of 2010.
As I understand it, whether it's the pilots of PCL demanding a picketing event, or it's the PCL MEC pushing it, it's the responsibility of the MEC to evaluate whether or not a picketing event will be productive.
If recalls were in order if there was not picketing due to the reasons listed - lapse of deadlines, bad faith negotiations, etc., then they would be unwarranted in my opinion. How can you accuse the company of negotiating in bad faith when sections continue to be TA'd? How can you complain about the lapse of deadlines when ALL MEC's see enough progress to continue negotiations? Both parties have to mutually agree to extended deadlines. It's the job of a rep to explain this to a pilot demanding a recall, that is, if the MEC only approved picketing because of fear of recall... Based on what I've read I still don't know what came first, PCL pilots demanding picketing, or PCL MEC believing it would be productive. Chicken and egg.
Many PCL pilots have been outspoken about needing militant reps. Give me a smart rep over a militant one any day. As my MEC has explained to me, typically an informational picketing event is conducted when negotiations are at a standstill, or management sends an insult across the table (like with what happened at the CommutAir negotiations regarding payscales earlier this year.) They've also explained to me the difference between merger negotiations and Section 6. On one hand the company experiences gains with synergies and increased economies of scale, on the other, they have no incentive to negotiate.
EDIT: My questions aren't aimed at you specifically KellWolf, just generally the comments I've seen from PCL pilots.