|
Sleepy,
DW is just the FDX MEC chairman, not the president of the United States. His "tough decisions" aren't about national defense. We don't want our MEC chairman blatantly going against our wishes. He isn't that smart and we aren't that dumb, so give me a break on the "he knows better" routine. Again, why does the change to age 65 need to come from aviation experts? It really is pretty simple if you ask me.... If Congress wants to change the rule, so what? Do we need an expert to change this rule? Sorry, I can't follow the logic again... I hope for a recall. I know he won't get booted from office, but at least that would give him a little wake up call. |
Sleepy,
First of all, thanks for volunteering for a sometimes thankless job. It takes guts to take a stand on a position and then to defend that position. I'm not sure I agree with your position on this but I do appreciate that you have the guts to stick your head into this beehive and duke it out with us. Regards, Mark |
Very well said Mark....
|
Originally Posted by SleepyF18
(Post 164991)
I would ask you though, do you feel that a leadership group should follow their memberships' majority if they feel it is wrong? Do we elect leaders to blindly follow us over a perceived cliff or do we elect them to make the hard, sometimes unpopular, decisions?
|
Originally Posted by SleepyF18
(Post 165031)
Someone asked for issues and I gave them. The Blue Ribbon Panel is working on the issues and some plans, and that should be out shortly.
|
Ditto
Originally Posted by MaydayMark
(Post 165059)
Sleepy,
First of all, thanks for volunteering for a sometimes thankless job. It takes guts to take a stand on a position and then to defend that position. I'm not sure I agree with your position on this but I do appreciate that you have the guts to stick your head into this beehive and duke it out with us. Regards, Mark |
Sleepy:
There are two kinds of pilots: 1. Those who will get 5 more years of captain pay, and 2. Those who will get 5 more years of F/O pay. If Dave has any bright ideas about giving group #2 a little bit of group #1's windfall from all this, now might be the time to whip 'em out.... |
Originally Posted by hamfisted
(Post 164955)
Sleepy...appreciate your feedback and standing by your decision....Retroactivity should be put to a vote..period.
It is unlawful for a labor organization to discriminate against any individual because of his age; to limit, segregate, or classify its membership, or to classify or fail or refuse to refer for employment any individual, in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities, or would limit such employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee because of such individual's age; or cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an individual. |
Originally Posted by SleepyF18
(Post 164944)
The MEC feels that without having a say in these issues, that these concerns won't be adequately addressed. So the plan is to trust the legislative affairs guys who tell them/us that, if we want to have any input in these issues, that our policy has to change first. They (Congress) are only taking the input of those that are for the change at this point. That is what we are being told.
I believe the pro-retroactive leaders need ALPA national to reverse policy to push for retroactive vs. prospective rights. |
Originally Posted by Huck
(Post 165074)
Sleepy:
There are two kinds of pilots: 1. Those who will get 5 more years of captain pay, and 2. Those who will get 5 more years of F/O pay. If Dave has any bright ideas about giving group #2 a little bit of group #1's windfall from all this, now might be the time to whip 'em out.... |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:40 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands