UPSAv8tr

Here is a copy of a post from Jim M. on the B & G. Its one of the most well written, thought out posts I've ever seen on the B & G. Here it is:

The vote in this years election will determine the direction of our association for years to come. I have been asked by many how I am voting and why. In these conversations what I often sense is an uneasiness on the part of voters as to who to vote for. They are searching for information to enable them to make a wise choice and feel that they really don't know who and why they should cast their vote. There is a sense that if they make the wrong choice that their career and life could be adversely impacted in a significant way. That is not trivial concern. We are always just one contract away from disaster.

Many in this section have given you their choices for office. I'll try to give you an evaluation of the candidates from where I stand. Having actively engaged in union affairs for twenty years now I am bound to see things a bit differently than some.

First off all I know all of the candidates except for James Shoemaker. Of the ones I know and can speak of all are intelligent, and I believe they all want the best for association. However they are very different persons and bring different skills, talents and strategies to the fight. None is an overwhelmingly clear winner. All have strengths and all have weaknesses. As a voter what I value may not be what you value so the discussion may be useful to you even if you don't agree with my choices.

Rick Derthick: Rick has a background in Grievance. He has been Secretary for the last three years. Rick is intelligent and knowledgeable concerning the contract. These are all pluses. On the negative side he has played it safe and not done much while in office. I consider him to be a protegee of Bob Miller and I think he has Bob's strengths and weaknesses. He is a good politician. He hasn't made any bad mistakes in this election but when it comes to actually getting something out of the Company maybe not so good.

If you liked Miller. Rick is your guy. I think you could very well see Bob Miller continuing in some other union capacity if Rick is elected. That is not something I desire though as I believe that the Miller way has underperformed in contract negotiations and has been incredibly ineffective in defending this present contract.

Bob Thrush I believe did an outstanding job as Grievance chair. He knows the contract better than any of the other two candidates. However the skill set you need to be president of the association and those you need as a committee chair are very different. Unfortunately Bob has a tendency to impetuous and rash in many of the things he does and says. He has demonstrated that during this campaign.In negotiations with UPS that could be disastrous. He has positioned himself as the anti-MOU candidate. I think that dumping the MOU would be a detrimental to lives and welfare of our junior members, and despite what some say I think keeping our people working and off the street shows our strength not our weakness. However if you feel differently and you want the MOU gone Bob is your candidate.

Scott Farley has a background in scheduling. He is the youngest of the candidates. I believe he made a mistake in the presidential debate by using the survey results to go after Bob Thrush. Had I seen this in him as common trait I would be worried but I haven't. I am willing, hoping, to put it down as a one time error due to being too competitive in the election because I have observed other characteristics in him over the last two years that I think qualifies him for the head office.

The people that work with you every day are the judge of who has the talents and skills necessary. The other board members who are not running for election this term have not come out publicly and endorsed a candidate however it is my sense that they in the office would prefer Scott. Don't take my word for it though call them up and ask them. These are the guys that would have to work with the next president and go into negotiations with him. These are the guys that have been working with the three candidates for the last few years.

In addition Scott doesn't seem rash, and seems to think issues through. By the way, thinking issues through and anticipating the counter moves of the other side seems to be a very rare quality among many of our members. He also seeks advice and the counsel of others. This is an extremely important characteristic is a new president. These are all characteristics that are difficult for a member on the outside to see and observe. As a guy that still stumbles through the office from time to time preparing for arbitration I have observed them in Scott. You are probably going to have a smoother running team under Scott with the present board members than you would with the other two candidates.

Scott has not been afraid to take a stand when it counted. He was a driving force behind the MOU and he stands behind and defends that decision. I know the popular conception is that all you have to do is pound the table harder and you get the contract you want, but it isn't nearly that simple. To succeed you need coolness, organizational ability and judgment. One never knows until you get into combat with the other side who will cut it and who won't. Being the president of the IPA, going up against UPS Labor, and taking care of the welfare of 3000 families is a tough tough job. After 20 years of sitting across the table from the other side my guess is that Scott is most likely to have those skills and represent our entire pilot group successfully. If I am correct you will develop a candidate that can represent your interests well for years to come.

For Secretary I am voting for Tom Kalfas. Tom is new to union work, but I believe him to be solid candidate for an executive position. He'll learn and I believe do well

I am voting for the amendment that allows for a runoff election.

I am voting against the amendment that gives up seniority until and when I know what the deal is. I am surprised there has not more debate on this very important issue. If you love pigs in pokes you should love this one.

As an old guy who is about to go on my way I have seen our organization grow and do well by our members. Whoever wins I hope that we will continue that success into the future.

757upspilot

Keep in mind that the person who posted this on the B&G has run for the position and was not elected, was placed on the negotiating committee to get our current contract by the one term President that he endorsed ( does anyone want to call that President a strong leader?).

Roberto

Sure, why not?

say that again

To answer your question if anybody wants to call that President a strong leader, I'll have to agree. I mean after all, who would call a United States Marine General who accomplished more in one term than the current president has done on 20 years??? (rolling eyes, tongue in cheek) We all know how you feel about the contract, just show us a better one. Sour grapes are not a virtue John.

767pilot

John? Are we on first names basis here? Can't be the "John" I'm thinking about as the spelling and grammar were correct .

candidate farley is being set up as the hero of the young and junior. I think that Jim M is trying very hard to establish and maintain his legacy with that same demographic. I agree with all that he has to say about each candidate, but I find a different conclusion. How about you? I know that you have worked closely with at least two of the candidates. You can speak freely as no one knows who you are

767pilot

His big mistake as a leader was being to close to Jim M.

Ernst

I have flown with both Steve Whyte and Tom Kalfas recently, both candidates for Secretary. It is important to remember that the Secretary has one vote on the Executive Board, the same as the President’s vote, and we need to be active to ensure both a good Secretary and President are elected this round.

My wholehearted opinion after conversing with both Steve and Tom is that all IPA members, including the potential castaways and displacees, will be best represented by Steve Whyte as Secretary.

Please let me share what I have learned about Steve Whyte:

1. Steve has been an IPA volunteer for 14 years, ever since he was on probation. I have read several kind letters in the IPA Times from people on whose behalf Steve has interceded. He picks up the phone for IPA members in need of advice and has served as a direct buffer from management for IPA members in jeopardy, even when at home on family time. He currently serves as the Chairman of the Accident Investigation Committee and has served as mediator, numerous times, to help IPA members keep their jobs when the company wanted to drop the hammer on them.

2. Steve has felt the pain of potential furloughees and displacees. He was furloughed in 1990 and knows the sting of seeing the door close behind you with no recognition of your current contributions or the experience that made you a competitive candidate in the first place. He has also been displaced several times during the recent UPS shuffle.

3. Steve lives in Louisville with his wife and daughters. He will be able to proactively manage IPA business while engaging line pilots where we live, flying the line. Steve flew a JFK morning turn and then went directly in uniform to the IPA candidate’s forum video taping session last month. He will not live in an ivory tower.

4. Steve has a servant’s heart. He served in union leadership early in his career at Northwest Airlink, trying to make that a better place when most of his peers were just trying to move on. He has served our IPA team, and helped improve IPA’s ability to serve, even when he was a new-hire commuting into SDF with many demands on his time. He truly has a desire to better our union and our lifestyle, not just advance whatever agenda serves his own interests.

5. Steve has demonstrated his desire and ability to build up IPA and work together with its various leaders and staff, unlike some of the angry men that would have us burn down our own house.

Please review Steve’s letters and videos on the IPA website and give him your confident vote of approval before Nov 30th so that we, and all of IPA, can be equally well represented in the challenging times ahead. Consider getting your vote in now, before tryptophan from the turkey kicks in and we all sleep through this opportunity to shape our future.

Please help Steve Whyte help you and help IPA. Thank you!

Here are my big picture thoughts, if you have time to read them and teach me from your experience:

The right leadership can be in the driver’s seat now guiding the company to improvements in the MOU, preserving IPA jobs and lifestyle, while management faces the looming uncertainties of changes to our rest rules and spurts of economic recovery. We can be on the offense, rather than the defense if we have EB members willing to enhance our contract with well crafted voluntary programs.

We need the MOU, not an IOU from IPA leadership. The vague promise of doing nothing now so that furlougees can return to a better contract some day in the future when they too can be a captain “like us” is not going to cut it for the people, not just numbers on a list but the people with faces, families and future goals, facing an imminent 100% pay cut. I can not imagine losing a job now and then trying to sell a house in this real estate market while struggling to find another job with 10% unemployment. Taking a loss on a house these days, even without a loss of income, can devastate one’s finances for long into the future.

I have learned that “contract enforcement” is sometimes a code word for: “It’s working for me, now get lost.” I am in favor of enforcing our contract creatively. Contract education and enforcement saves jobs. However, top-down leadership that buries its head in the sand and hopes that the storm will pass, while they sleep under the comfortable blanket of the contract, threatens jobs and everyone’s lifestyle. After the unfortunate perfect-storm of the recession, age 65 change, retirement of three fleets and UPS stockholder vote approving a senior executive pay package with bonus incentives to reduce headcount and payroll costs, we need to elect IPA leadership willing to work full throttle to be creative in representing the best interests of # 2857 just a vigorously as # 1 on our list.

From my perspective, the voluntary MOU is not a threat to the contract, but a quality of life enhancement to the contract. There are undoubtedly potential improvements that could be made to the existing MOU by creative and responsive leadership, but the concept is solid and it has helped to keep our lifestyle from spiraling out of control, lest we find ourselves near the bottom of a list in another domicile, or with a 100% pay cut. I would like to be able to take a short leave of absence or RDG with benefits in 2013 and beyond, in order to improve my family life, if our next contract should allow that option. Why not see the MOU as a win for quality of life now and in the future?

Everyone on the bottom two-thirds of the seniority list needs to understand how their lifestyle will change with a Reduction In Force using the special RIF displacement rules. Everyone in the top third needs to adopt an attitude fitting the name “union” and encourage creative solutions to conditions that threaten the membership. Unfortunately, three senior jumpseaters on a flight I operated from SLC to SDF expressed this sentiment:

[Regarding the recent IPA effort to preserve union jobs] “I didn’t know it was a unity thing.” (6/18/2009)

“When guys sign up at the bottom of a list, they should know what to expect.” (6/18/2009)

[Regarding the recent IPA effort to preserve union jobs] “What we really need a union for is to fix the bunk situation on the 767. It has a place for it, why is there no bunk? That’s something that a captain can not fix on his own.” (6/18/2008)

[Regarding the recent IPA effort to preserve union jobs] “Everyone has a reason [for not participating]. I’ve learned that I am just one person.” [i.e., my failure to participate does not matter]. (6/18/2008)

“I won’t be around for the next contract, but [the recent IPA effort to preserve union jobs] will really weaken our position if the company knows that we want to work less.” (6/18/2009)

I personally saw a shiny new contract come under assault at another carrier. I was furloughed soon after a big pay scale raise was negotiated and never did return to that carrier. Fortunately, I was furloughed into the upside of an economic bubble and never looked back. The current prospects for any dues-paying members of IPA put on the street while IPA leadership under represents their interests are grim. Do you remember when UPS wanted only over-qualified candidates with heavy-jet time, and it even helped to be a Space Shuttle Commander? We are victims of our own success believing that pilots mattered to the company. We are just drag on the system now that we have a comfortable pay scale and expensive benefits. It helps to think of ourselves as burdens, rather than contributors, only because that is how we are now viewed from the company’s perspective. I don’t like it and wish I still had my clean resume to shop around before UPS clouded it, but it’s true. NetJets just furloughed 500 pilots. The good corporate jobs will be hard to find.

As a result, we need to work to be heard by our union leadership and insist on representation that best serves our interests. If a furlough should happen under the leadership of an anti-MOU candidate, everyone on the bottom two-thirds that is affected should hold a tea party at IPA headquarters protesting the dues collection without representation!

Everyone here accepted the implicit promise that, if only you bite the bullet on poverty-level first year pay, this will be your last job. It is ridiculous for some IPA leadership candidates, who have never seen dire straits at UPS, to gamble with the lives of the junior people who have just recently survived the paltry first year pay, perhaps incurring debt that year, and survived either an almost immediate pay cut to DC-8 engineer pay or the cost of moving or commuting to Anchorage. They are also the same group that gave up the most in the MOU, rather than save for their rainy day. How much more can these former jewels in UPS’ crown take? They were the same ones heavily recruited because of their exceptional qualifications, only now to be abused by UPS and subject to abuse by exclusively senior-minded IPA members and potential leaders.

From what I have learned, I believe that Scott Farley will also best represent the interests of all IPA members. We absolutely do not need an angry man with all thrust and no vector as President, or a “captain’s captain” as Secretary.

Please help yourself and the rest of IPA by voting for leadership that is responsive to your needs as they change, rather than leadership that represents only those who are best served by existing pieces of paper living in a vacuum. May the contract survive intact and proactive leaders who solicit imput find other ways to keep our coworkers and friends employed here.

767pilot

nice letter, Ernst

nightrider

Ernst,

Steve turned his back on us when b.m. lost the last election, and walked away from the negotiating commitee. Taking with him the hundreds of thousands we had spent on him. I will not vote for someone who turned his back on the pilot group, when we needed him the most.

nightrider

767pilot

What hundreds of thousands? We sent him to Harvard for a week or so long coourse, not a doctorate. Steve is a good guy. I didn't realize why those guys walked until after I had a sit down talk with each one separately. Our mistake was in not listening to their warning signs at the time.