Originally Posted by TonyC (Post 1333766)

You've chosen an interesting example that has an interesting connection with the "Hong Kong 4." They chose to forgo the easy route of submission to The Company's proffer of a settlement, and instead have risked their livelihoods on standing for principle.

When Auburn Calloway attempted the hijacking on April 7, 1994, ALPA was in its infancy at Federal Express. After several failed attempts, ALPA won a vote in 1992 to be the Federal Express Pilots' first Collective Bargaining Agent. However, challenges by Federal Express and an anti-union pilot group delayed certification until 1993. Contract negotiations then began, and led to the NMB releasing both parties to self-help in 1995.

Prior to the purchase of The Flying Tiger Line by Federal Express, one pilot was, shall we say, outspoken about organizing the pilots. Without a union, the Federal Express pilots would have no advocate in the case of a seniority list integration. (Of course, we all know how smoothly that went, with lawsuits continuing for decades.) Based on Compuserve postings made by that pilot which were illegally obtained by another pilot's wife and forwarded to Fred Smith, Barney Barnhart's manager ordered him to undergo a psychiatric evaluation. Barney refused.

Barney was advised by ALPA to undergo the psychiatric evaluation in order to keep his job. The Company even offered to let Barney choose the doctor. Barney refused. Barney was terminated for insubordination. Barney sued Federal Express for wrongful termination. Here's the connection to Calloway: the judge who heard his case was the same judge who heard U.S. vs Auburn Calloway.

(I don't know if ALPA represented Calloway in his termination. Since we didn't have a CBA, there wasn't really a process to defend. Even by today's rules, it should have been a simple matter to insure he was afforded due process. It should be pretty obvious, though, that it's difficult to show up for work when you're serving 2 consecutive life sentences in Atwater, CA.)


Now, here's the connection he has to the Hong Kong 4. He could have bowed to pressure, swallowed his pride, violated his conscience, and submitted to a psychiatric evaluation, and kept his job. But he didn't. He stood on principle, knowing he was in the right, knowing that it could cost him his career with Federal Express. The Hong Kong 4 could also have confessed to doing wrong, subjected themselves to the monetary penalties and punitive actions, and kept their jobs. But they didn't. They stood on principle, knowing they were in the right, and knowing that it could cost them their career with FedEx Express.

So, many people will look back in hindsight and say, "Well, looks like Barney shoulda taken the deal." While you're looking back, look at our first Collective Bargaining Agreement and thank him for this paragraph: The story of the Hong Kong 4 is not over yet.






.

Originally Posted by MeXC (Post 1334954)

“Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against – then you’ll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We’re after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you’d better get wise to it. There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”

Originally Posted by whitekeys (Post 1334974)

That's a familiar quote. Wasn't it from that book, ALPA Shrugged? (actually, I hear they're not exactly shrugging right now).

Originally Posted by Redeyz (Post 1338639)

DW BC would be the first in a long line. Along with Company negotiators proffering FDA v 1.0 and v 1.1. It was a turd from the get go and should have been voted down.

Originally Posted by Iwa Washi (Post 1338707)

what many seem to forget is that only 25% of the membership even bothered to vote in the first place.

Votes Cast: 1100 (25.1% participation)
Votes For: 690 (62.78%)
Votes Against: 409 (37.22%)
/I]

Originally Posted by Iwa Washi (Post 1338707)

The results of the balloting are as follows:

Votes Cast: 1100 (25.1% participation)
Votes For: 690 (62.78%)
Votes Against: 409 (37.22%)

The MEC would like to thank the pilots that participated in this vote.[/I]