I ask my block representative to reprint block 5 letter to our LEC group, he said he didn't want to influence a no vote from our group. Besides he happy with his yes vote, I guess the block opinions only go one way.

 

Wow --- I thought their policy is that we got to decide.

Always telling when leadership is scared of dissenting opinions getting out.

Maybe it's an FDA thing --- like the Chinese blocking access to Google and CNN when things heat up politically.

 

Was TC on the MEC/LEC/NC at the time of LOA v1.o?? I do not recall him being involved... I remember 2 of the NC folks at the time, and none of the LEC guys.

 

While I do not agree with his final concusion I think TC did an excellent job of presenting the facts and representing the opposing view.

Don't know why the MEC would have a problem with what he said, but remember there are two sides to every story.

 

Yes, I remember this point as well.

 

They did publish the dissenting views. That was much shorter. I would guess that the bylaws govern the content. It appears that TC and BM chose not to utilize all the space available for that?

On just putting out a block reps email to everyone, has that ever happened? I thought they just put it out to their LEC with the exception of above?

I do not know the answers, and from reading this thread, it is obvious that they "no on TA" crowd doesn't either. Just a lot of attacks without bothering to actually learn the truth.

 

The truth is, that in order for an LEC letter to be posted on the Alpa website for everyone to see (which is the norm) it must be approved by the MEC. This letter was not approved, so it will not appear on the website. The only way to get the letter out was for him to send it via email to his group.

There is nothing in the letter that is not true, so why would the MEC choose to block his communications to the entire pilot group?

As for the length of the official dissenting view, I would only assume that it was severely edited by the MEC.

Shameful.

 

Now reread this thread and see who is doing the attacking.

 

For the record, when I was a rep under the previous administration, I sent out a few notes directly to my block as Tony did here. You always have that option, and at times it is a tool that can be used be an elected rep.

I think many of you are seeing a conspiracy where there isn't one. I am no longer a rep (whew!) but I can say the 12 folks that discussed this TA all had the same long range vision...a better contract that largely addresses many of the inputs made by the crew force. The desired timeline for that goal is soon. The NPRM complicated things according to some experts, and this TA was viewed as one option. As we discussed our options, several folks thought this might help us in the short term and not slow down our long term goals. Two members ultimately thought maybe it would. So---that is the disagreement. What was NOT in disagreement is everyone wants the same thing on the back side of our next TA.

In any tough decision, there are pros and cons. TC and BM leaned Con, the rest of us Pro. But I don't think that any of those differences should convince you there all 12 of us weren't working towards the same ultimate goal. Each of you gets a vote, and I hope you weigh the arguments and make the best decision for you and your families.

What I do think everyone needs to understand, however, is sometimes in the hard work of hammering out ideas and issues at the table, feelings get hurt and people get angry. Making the leadership changes two years ago in the MEC created a lot of angst and ill will, and even today our MEC officers sometimes face some resentment and resistance from people both inside and outside the union since "their team" isn't in the leadership role. I would ask everyone on here a simple question...do you think the changes in tone, communication, and effectiveness in your union have been positive or negative? I obviously think its been largely positive, and a lot of that is due to the efforts of your current officers. I would simply ask as you read different accounts and opinions that you keep the big picture on where the author's perspective might be on a given issue and if there might also be underlying motives or perspectives that might bias that view. Fox News and MSNBC might both report an event, but I think we would agree each might paint the same event in very different manners. Try to keep your eyes open, get some different opinions, then make a smart, educated decision. There are no heros here, nor are there any huge villains. There are, however, a lot of people working hard for you that sometimes see the world from very different perspectives, and that is going to create some inevitable friction at times.

My take for those of you screaming the loudest is simple. Take up the challenge I did to get off your ass, get off the boards, and go get involved. What you will find, as did my friend the late Fred Buesser, is that it is much harder than it looks and requires a level of commitment that might surprise you. You'll find plenty of folks who are giving it their best shot, and they could probably use your help.

 

Good points Albie.