If CD isn't just making stuff up, which that is anyone's guess, my thinking is this:

ARW ALPA asks UAL MEC to get UAL management to allow ARW pilots to check box. UAL MEC asks UAL flight dept/HR and they say yes that's fine. UAL MEC gives ARW MEC green light for comm. (<-This is actually true) CD, now confused, calls someone (I'm assuming high level, maybe low level, but probably high level) and says "did y'all say yes to this?" Manager or executive who doesn't muddle in individual depts business because they have plenty to do at levels well above HR and Flight says "I'm not sure, I doubt that we did." CD puts out hate mail saying UAL didn't authorize that and the freak out begins among the pilots. (<-This part is speculation)

While I think the email from CD was in poor taste to both the pilots and to ALPA, she isn't necessarily lying. ARW and UAL ALPAs sure aren't lying despite that being everyone's initial reaction. Believe me, the ALPA attorneys do not allow comms like that to be printed until they are satisfied it is accurate.[/QUOTE]

 

Was there an email from the MEC Im not seeing?

 

[/QUOTE]

I want to give her the benefit of the doubt. I really want to assume that this is just a miscommunication issue rather than the CEO of a company blatantly lying to employees . That being said, whoever she spoke to at united, I would like to think that if a CEO of a regional calls you over somthing of this importance, that person would look into the issue and in this case, eventually find out that yes, hr had authorized that. I find it hard to believe she calls someone high up at united and they categorically deny it without themselves having looked into it or knowing anything about it.

 

So absolutely BEST CASE scenario is the company finds homes for its now 65 strong fleet of dilapidated 50 seat CRJs. Pay is still one of the lowest among the industry, no tangible bonus structure (laughable piddly amount) and now the CEO is trying to scare people into staying by flat out lying about talking to "someone" at United and sending a shot gun email out trying to scare people.

WHY ARE THERE ANY FOs STILL ON PROPERTY?!?

 

CD: What's this I hear about distressed carrier?

United: I am unaware of any deal, let me check on Monday.

CD to pilot group: I called United and they were unaware of any deal...

It's like what the media does on a daily basis. She wasn't wrong in her words but it wasn't in context. It did, however, cause panic among people who thought UAL would black list them for "lying" on their app. Don't ever underestimate this management group to do some shady stuff for a short term gain and long term fallout. The people that served under both SO and then BF can attest to that. You might get your flying that day covered by screwing over pilots with loopholes you can exploit in the contract, but you just ruined their loyalty.

 

That ship sailed a while ago haha

 

Hence why is brought up the shift in dynamic between SO and BF. One had the loyalty of all the pilots and one doesn't.

 

This very well may be the case. And I hope it is. I hope this is just a mistake. If that's the case and it was a mistake or rush to judgement on her part. Now that it's been confirmed, she needs to immediately admit she was wrong, admit that united considers awac distressed, explain her error. She can disagree with the label of distressed and for all we know we have a bright future here but her email on Friday night was wrong and she needs to own that.

 

sorry for the nooB question - but does being 'distressed' or furloughed put you at the front of the line or something - like you are a charity case?

 

This doesn't put ZW pilots in front. It adds points to their applications. At least that's how the MEC comm reads.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk