Busboy, Do you think when Google needs some lawyers to defend a patent that they use their in house experts to fight the battle?

No, they hire outside law firms with great lawyers that find the right experts and learn that patent inside and out are good at what they do. This is what we need. Our work rules and scheduling are easy for these type of lawyers to understand. While I agree that we are our own worst enemy it's for more reasons than "unity"

 

Interest based bargaining, is still alive and well.....think about it......

Long ago, we had a pres. (BC), that went on to be the head of Airbus standards.
PC was around during the FPA days, and look where he is now.
WH was VP of the union, and has worked his way into the training department after letting sec. 11 get mangled by the company.
JG is now a fleet captain, while also on watch when sec. 11 was being written
BM was one of the unions chief negotiators negotiators
LK.....need I say more?
Where will DW show up for his dealings with the 777? Only time will tell.

There is still interest based bargaining, it's just in the interest of those doing the dealings that are being rewarded.

Unfortunately, this is how business is done when greed and egos take over.

 

It all boils down to 2 steps

Step 1; Line pilots have the leverage and must exercise it!
Call it Unity, Solidarity , fortitude, resolve or whatever you like.
We are the key to the leverage, not ALPA National, not our MEC, Not $2000/ hour professional hired negotiators.

The line pilots and instructor pilots hold all the power.

Step 2 ;If that isn't enough to get movement at the table, then the hope is the
NMB will release us to self help. There are many checks in the block that must be filled before this happens.

You don't want to go to step 2 if you can't do step 1. So far I have never seen this group show they have Step 1 material. Look in the mirror and look to each other, for we are the only ones who will get us a " Good Contract" that everyone here seems to be searching for.

Believe me, the $2000/hour professional negotiators won't be in any hurry to get a deal, why would they?

 

The important take-aways from the original thread intent is that:

1. CB,TH and BM are conducting slash/burn and scorched earth operations on their way out (and they are on their way out) in order to do as much damage to the present Administration and current Unity as possible. And remove/damage as many committee personnel who support the current business model.

2. This reveals that they actually were/are operating with an original intent and agenda to harm/remove the current administration and not in our collective best interest. That indeed they truely believe that the average line pilot is incapable of choosing what they want and must "be told" what the correct course is.

Lastly, I find it ludicrous that any "Senior" crew members would by into any "Senior vs. Junior" rhetoric being espoused by the recalee's . Their positions will be duly filled by members of similar seniority. Their representation (seniority wise) will not change.

 

I agree we are in the midst of a scorched earth operation. We are coming closer to failure every day we subject elected members, appointed members or even just members in good standing to harsh, public personal attacks. Critique is one thing, vilification is quite another.

There is a new message out basically saying we can have these attacks yet still remain unified and strong when it counts. Presumably the crucible of public disagreement (infighting and name calling?) will make us stronger in the end.

I simply cannot agree with her assessment or obvious dislike of the recall process. Just because it's seldom used does not mean it's wrong. Accepting and explaining away MEC member misconduct because they're "one of your own" is not appropriate IMHO. Circling the wagons only creates more suspicion.

 

As an addendum to my above post:

Indeed FDX Block 8, we may have overlooked one in this regrettable but necessary recall process. Only the ANC crew force can decide this. My sense is that the majority there are watching and evaluating. They are no strangers to unified action..........time will tell.

 

"we may have overlooked one"

Wow! What, has the MEC elected Stalin as our chairman? Is this the "Great Purge"? REMOVE ALL DISSENTERS!!!

That is truly the most pathetic thing I have read on this subject.

 

My understanding is strategic direction MEC meetings are typically behind closed doors. I think the term is executive session.

Can someone explain how it's appropriate, according to some MEC members, to publicly discuss the content of those meetings?

We're witnessing some serious, public MEC on MEC violence here. These disagreements used to be kept behind closed doors.

I do think they can be healthy to the process but only in the proper venue.

 

Question for the professional negotiator fans. Do you feel that this is a really well thought out idea? To me it seems to be more of one borne of general frustration with the nator of the RLA, the union politics of the day, and for some a philosophical dislike of being in an union and what that requires to get a contract done. JMO, but when I look at the idea of professional negotiators I wonder who these people might be. A simple google of terms like aviation labor lawyers/negotiators or labor negotiators pretty much brings a bunch of firms specializing in negotiation from the management side of things, aviation accident law, or workplace claims for individuals. That's not particularly surprising as those areas are where the majority of the business is in our sector. This is an example of one of the webpages from one law firm: Fisher & Phillips LLP - Solutions at Work - Labor Relations . So a little flash cash every few years or so from us pilots is going to get guys like this on our side? Also it occurs to me that it is highly likely that there's a good chance that many of the best of these guys have not only worked at other airlines against employees, but possibly even our company. FDX is a big company with a lot of arms, and several law firms work both sides of the aisle on such issues. It wouldn't surprise me if FDX did something along the lines of what gderek said and maybe hired out to a local firm in say Portland to handle something like workman's comp claims against the company. How is that everyday business going to play out when we ask the same firm to negotiate against the same company every four years?

This seems like a relatively small subsection of the legal profession, and it seems likely that the best attorneys that haven't aligned themselves with ALPA (national), Teamsters, APA, SWAPA, etc have aligned themselves with the companies themselves. In fact we often see word that ALPA has loaned out their services to other unions for various things. If we aren't going to be using any of those attorneys for negotiations, we're going to be fishing from the other pond and I find it hard to feel comfortable with those guys on our side of the table. We've had parking lot deals and the current MC is being accused of unilateral negotiation actions, but we're to believe that lawyers that do deals for a living are going to be stopped from ex part comm because we have a pilot rep in there? Especially when we're possibly talking about firms that either have or had a prior relationship with the company in what is a small world. Take a look at some of the so-called outside consultants ALPA and others have hired over the years to do 'independent analysis' of things usually in concessionary contract negotiations. Peel back the layers and you often find things like the firm having prior relationships with the company in question, getting part or all of their fee paid by the company not the union if a deal is reached, and getting the bulk of their 'independent' analysis data from the company itself.

I read a comment earlier from someone saying that they don't care what happened at airline XYZ, but you should lest it happen to you to, and it's not hard to see where this idea could go wrong. All that said, I expect the general response to be a grumpy 'we can't do any worse than what we have now,' so why did I type this!! Party on, Garth.

 

No Busboy, that is not the intent of my post. As the smoke clears from this recent turmoil, a number of additional communiques have been published that still advocate the silencing of dissenting opinions and the dis-enfranchising of the membership at large in the process, placing all decision making power squarely in the hands of a 'few" who "know better". I am a strong proponent of the the democratic process and always have been. I also believe in the current Union model of meaningfully engaging the Co. on our desired issues in a forthright, mature business like approach that seeks to find the best solutions for us while at the same time keeping our Company (whom your and all of our fortunes are unbreakably linked) competitive in the world market. Any notion of "Old School My Way or the Highway" trade unionism is not only obsolete but ultimately self destructive given our current global economy. I have no illusions about our Mgmts desire to remove our Organized body from the property, that is their job. But at the same time, we are here, and as long as we are Mgmt must engage us in negotiations for our contract plain and simple. What I will not stand for is secretive divisive machinations by any of our elected Reps. These situations are not in your, my or any of our collective interests and must be confronted and dealt with by us. Also, I used the "we" in the royal plural, sense meaning the entire crew force, not some imagined "Stalinesque" cabal.