FLMD11CAPT

As an ANC member I am once again flabbergasted, frustrated, and frowning at our MEC Chairs behavior. In an 11-2 vote (as announced by our MEC) Scott L was voted in as the new Neg . Chair. Scott L, a standing NC member, brings a hope of continuity to our negotiations after their previous NC Chair RI resigned in the face of the ANC Rep's (Susie L) public and inappropriate Snippet was published against Peer and Legal counsel. Susie L.Voted against (again) the majority in the NC Chair confirmation. ANC Domicile.......when are we going to tire of this direct sabotage of our desires? We used to be considered the Vangard of FDX Union activism....the Leaders in doing the hard and right thing to obtain our collective goals. Now, for the past several quarters we have been made the laughing stock by our Reps position, efforts and voting record. She has been totally marginalized and cannot effectively represent us. I for one am glad her term expires this fall. I can only hope she fulfills her original campaign promise of serving only one term.......

P.S. The other dissenting vote was the interim block 1 Rep. How can that be?????? Hey, Interim Block 1 Rep.....please explain?????

The Walrus

It boils down to whether (weather, for you online graduates) you follow the SS bible of unionism or another religion. Personally, I think they are all a little shifty.

If you are not a SS fan, then she is doing a good job. Just enough to make waves but not enough to get ejected.

2dogs

classy

The Walrus

Classy, I'm a freakin Walrus!

HazCan

LEC Meeting is on Monday @1130. Peanut Farm. Come call her out there. I've found her more than willing to explain herself and her position if you just take the time to ask.

HKFlyr

Funny that he is complaining...sounds like a SS plant to me, as most in ANC support her. She has had no agenda other than supporting her members best with what they want and with what she sees.

As a HK guy, wasn't impressed with SL when he spent 10 minutes out here at our LEC meeting, said how great things are, meeting regular with company, but no answer on why we are still at the table when 4 are on the street.

SS couldn't answer who we needed to negotiate with on it, not to mention he didn't know how many pilots were in the domicile...

They didn't do much here and then left quickly. I ain't the only one cynical about how much they are really doing...this MEC meeting will say a lot. Hopefully this will change.

She had good reason to vote against him if she did. Ask her instead of pontificating here...but again, that is APC...(forgot where I was for a second)

Glad we had this chat.

TonyC

Hey, Greg, where did you get the vote count? I saw the announcement of who was selected, but not the vote count, or who voted which way. It would not be productive, and is therefore uncommon, for the MEC to publish the vote count. Even the MEC Meeting minutes will only report the outcome of votes as PASSED or FAILED except in extraordinary circumstances.

I won't comment on the former Negotiating Committee Chairman's reasons for resigning other than to say that it wasn't his first time to resign, and the reasons you've reported are not correct.

If you really want to know why Susie voted whatever way she voted, why don't you ask her? She's your Block Rep, and you have a right to know. She includes her e-mail address at the bottom of every Snippet, and it's even formatted as a hyperlink, so all you have to do is click on it. You don't even have to remember, or copy and paste, or anything. Just click, ask your question, and sign your name.

Hmmm. Maybe that's why ...

If you're curious about why the Block 1 Rep voted however he voted, you could ask him politely. He also has an ALPA e-mail address. [email protected] will get to him. Oh, and look ... that's a hyperlink.

I don't see where his vote was published, either. Where are you getting your info?


Like has already been mentioned, I recommend you attend a Local Council 79 meeting. It would seem that your sentiments are out of tune with those generally voiced at the meetings.

Oh, and one last thing, her term doesn't end this fall.






.

Gunter

Tony,

You running a private investigation or are you participating in blog discourse?

So what if the information was not "readily available"? We should all stand up for what we believe in, not hide behind a veil of secrecy. We all vote for Reps so shouldn't we know their voting record to give us a chance to make an informed decision? I don't think you want to give the average line pilot that chance. Instead, I see a desire to shape the message from you on a regular basis. That must be why you had trouble finishing out your term.

BTW, the information you just disclosed about RI resigning more than once wasn't "readily available" either. You say you didn't want to comment but did so anyway. Slick.

Should we write you up for releasing info you shouldn't???

Like your tag line but I don't think you believe in it anymore

FLMD11CAPT

Tony,....Tony....Tony, Nice spin job Bro. I am quite confident you nor my Block Rep want to get into a historical (or recent, as noted by Gunther) discussion of releasing "Privileged" info. As far as communicating directly w/my Rep. suffice it to say I have had multiple interactions and have communicated numerous times over past couple of years, in person as well as via e-mail. In fact I was contacted via PM IRT something posted on this board......so your personal little "outing" campaign is actually quite funny (not to mention sophomoric). As far as asking My Rep why she voted against the New NC in the face of an overwhelming majority to the contrary, no need. I already know why. She is institutionally against any and all initiatives stemming from the current administration. She, like you just cannot seem to get over the fact that the vast majority of the crew force is not only tired of your agenda but want to press forward with the current Admins plan, form and style. In a nut shell, Tony, Get Over It and start rowing the boat with the collective will of the crew force. You and the few like you had your bite at the apple, were unequivocally told no and yet you continue to foment. Get Over Yourself.....the answer always was and still is ....No.........Cheers

TonyC

Gunter, you are absolutely correct. We should all stand up for what we believe in, including the Anchorage Block Rep. I didn't argue that the information should be kept secret; I only noted that it is not widely available. You'll notice that I told Greg he's entitled to the information. I never ignored an e-mail from a constituent or refused to answer -- it's the member's right to know. Every member has that right.

The curious thing in this instance is that Greg claimed the information was announced by our MEC, when it was not. The only people who would have known how each Block Rep voted would be the people in the room when the vote occurred, and those people to whom they have communicated. Although most sessions are open to any member in good standing -- and the election of a Negotiating Committee Chairman would most likely be in open session -- rarely do "members at large" attend. The only people in the room were the MEC, the professional staff, and the committee members who were attending, most while being compensated through our dues money.

Don't get me wrong. If somebody wants to sit in the room with their laptop and blog what's going on in real time, I don't have a problem with that. It's not a secret society, there should be no secrets kept from the members. (There are times when certain topics, such as negotiating strategy, are discussed, and we don't want The Company to know the details, so those sessions are closed to the MEC and a limited number of other participants, but that's the exception.)

But what is curious is that Greg did not attribute his source as one of those present in the room -- he said it was announced my the MEC. Why is he being coy about his source? It seems a little disingenuous to me, and it makes me question his motive for coming on APC and blasting his Rep instead of extending a professional courtesy to her by asking her himself.

It's very easy to rant and rave and be DEstructive, especially when you feel like you're somewhat anonymous. It's an entirely different thing to do something CONstructive. It requires taking a little bit of responsibility and courtesy. Sometimes it's hard work.

We can probably guess which path pleases our employer more.


I was careful not to say I didn't want to comment. I made two comments and left it at that. I don't see a need to hijack this thread, but I wanted to at least point out that the information he had given about the resignation was incorrect. He might want to check his source(s).

While the information I shared is not widely known, it's not private or privileged.


It's just as true now as it ever was, and I firmly believe in it.

What I've begun to wonder, though, is if the truth is enough. Some people don't seem to appreciate the truth unless it comes in a shiny package or comes with a gimmick -- kinda like a Happy Meal.






.