• I'm thinking we should approach the Company and ask for a Preferential Bidding System. In return, we can disband the Scheduling Committee and the Scheduling Improvement Group and the whole Disputed Pairing mess.
• I'm thinking we should forgo any move packages to the China and Europe Domiciles. If we can't afford to move over on our own dime and live for 5 years or more, we're just poor managers of our money.
• I'm thinking we should delete our Scope clause -- shoot, those are tough disputes to argue in court anyway -- in exchange for Chinese pilots flying our Asian routes.
• Most importantly, I would campaign vigorously to recall the MEC Chairman, and would oppose him at every turn on every issue until he is ousted.

How's that for a platform? Would a fella get elected on that?



.

Daniel,

Prater talked about this when he was in Memphis. He understands ALPA policy, and has no intention of violating it. The Airways pilots have a voice, and he is willing to hear it. That doesn't mean he wants to or has the ability to do anything about it beyond listening. He is keenly aware that no arbitrated seniority settlement has been overturned, and sees extremely little chance that this one will. He acknowledged that the only reason he could fathom that would justify such an action would be fraud. He has an obligation to hear the voices, and to examine the facts. Once he determines that no fraud was involved, I expect to see no changes to the seniority settlement.

If he goes beyond that, I'm right there with you.




.

-If it's the "right thing to do." It would sure help our top 5% if the pref bidding went into effect, that way none of this international stuff mixed with an out and back.
-Only the 5% that would want to go to China or Europe are already there, so they don't need a move package and we could put the saved money into a bonus for longevity,
-I'm sure the scope clause could be limited to after the top 5% bid, then Chinese pilots get the what's left,
-Well why would you want to oust yourself, unless it's the "right thing to do?"

Well Said
 

Yeah! A fella could get elected on that, especially after the union put enough spin on it. Anyone going to the Hub meeting tonight

RV

I'm sure tonights meeting will be much of the same rhetoric that Dave tried to pass off as gospel at the last hub meeting.

No thanks.

FJ

Tony,

So you are saying that if we don't roll with DW, and if somehow we get disenfranchised by our current leadership, that the only replacement would be someone who would gut our contract and cause us severe pain down the road? You imply if we get some new leadership nobody else will fight the "other" battles for us but Dave, and nobody but him can save us from cabotage, PBS, and a host of other evils.

I'll say it again. DW is not Jesus Christ. You play devil's advocate for him, and smugly point out that there are many other issues to deal with. You are correct in that there are more than this issue on the table. But what you miss is his handling of the CRITICAL issue has made him lose credibility with most of the crew force.

Protect him if you must. However--its a Pyrric victory. You can take the satisfaction of winning an argument or intellectual debate, but the cost of victory is tremendous. Who would you pick tomorrow if DW died or left the company? Would we all be up $hit creek leaderless and in limbo? I doubt it. So--who else out there can step up and do the job?

This guy has alienated about everyone on the junior side of the list at FedEx and a host of the senior ones too. Why are you so committed to trying to sway everyone's minds about keeping him around when his continued presence is going to hurt all of us?

Its time for a change.

Unity can return. Education and lecturing won't do it. It will take trust. DW doesn't have it. With 4900 pilots to choose from, I imagine we can round up someone who'd give us their best shot for $250,000 plus.

Not at all. I don't worship DW, and I've offered him criticism on numerous occassions. The point I was trying to make, and apparently didn't, was that choosing a candidate on the sole criteria that he opposes DW would be short-sighted. I don't think we'll ever serve ourselves well by voting for an "anti-" candidate.

Voting for a better candidate is always a good thing.


I think there's some mending that needs to be done. What, and how, and how long remain to be seen. If the Block 8 Representative is sensitive to that need, and handles it well, then I see little to gain by ousting him because he supported the MEC Chairman on a single issue. Even if he handles it well and restores the confidence of his constituents, if there's a better candidate next time, vote for him. But don't vote against a guy because he made one tough call that you didn't like.




.

i thought it was my vote, and if i decide to vote against someone for an issue as important to me as this, who are you to tell me or anyone different? isn't that MY right as a dues paying member?

Yepp, it's your right to vote as you please.


I can only give you on opinion. :)




.

Tony,

I probably shouldn't stick my neck in here since I am not one of you guys, but as a former MEC member for a large PAX airline I have to congratulate you as a voice of reason. In my former environs it seemed like the more extreme the comment the less likely the individual is to be willing to do the heavy lifting of a volunteer. Few understand how big a sacrifice it is to do this work. It's great to be principled, but it is dumb to fall on the sword of principle and loose everything when by working the system you can finish with so much more. I wish you guys the best.