The question isn't whether they are defending them or not, or with how much effort. It is why isn't there an assessment. I totally understand your questions other than that Bill. What did your Rep or our leadership tell you when you called and raised these points?

 

I think the lack of a vote for an assessment - which was proposed at the last MEC meeting, but didn't make it to a vote - or the lack of the MEC putting up a volunteer donation fund speaks for itself.

The HK 4 are being supported by donations in a fund set up by pilot volunteers not associated with the MEC, as they didn't want to get involved...they made that clear by their recent inaction.

Donations have come in from all over, and some of the individual checks being written are humbling.

What have you done to support your fellow pilot?

All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke -

While I don't consider my company evil, I do consider this a bullying, union-busting, hostage ploy...and we need to do more. THE MEC NEEDS TO DO MORE - we as individual pilots need to do more. And all we hear from the MEC leadership is crickets chirping.

Glad those officers are making all that extra money...I'm still wondering what it is for, especially when they are having to bring in MEC members, not officers, on flight pay loss to help man the office while none of them are there.

Glad we had this little chat.

 

Yeah. I'm glad too. I just can't get enough of keyboard cowboys spouting off union bashing opinions and cute catch phrases. Sure is easier than calling up and having a conversation about why the union didn't do the things you are whining about. I called and spoke with a few and am satisfied with their answers. No one is happy with this but I understand why they feel their actions are now limited due to the 4 seeking private counsel. I also understand how much we have spent defending the 4 and the amount was staggering. It's easy to cast aspersions against our leadership here. If they are not fulfilling their duties in the office like you say, please provide evidence like their schedules and when they were not in the office. I would be interested to see this. If you can't do this please retract your statement above. BTW, I have supported the 4 and I support my union leadership as well. The 2 aren't mutually exclusive in my book.

 

LOL, accused of whining...I like that. I have spent more time on the phone with many of our reps, on this and other issues. Have most of their phone numbers and personal emails.

1. They won't supply their schedules/calenders. That went away under this administration. Try and get a calender from them, or from a committee volunteer, who takes significant flight pay loss. Again, not required.

2. Personally witnessed what I have seen. How many of the 4 do you know or have you talked to? The major support for the 4 started in the end game, when the die was cast, and we traded away our leverage. We actually had something the company wanted that we could have used to resolve this issue and we gave it away for our 3% payraise. (The LOA we got was not negotiated, it was handed to us by the company in an attempt to get more FO's out here, we made very minor changes to it)

Ask for calenders to be published! I already know the answer on that, as does Tony. They all but did away with the financial oversight committee immediately after this gang came into office. FACT. Ask them how many times MEC members - NOT MEC OFFICERS, have come in on flight pay loss to be "duty officers". A FACT that is again, more than you want to know. We as members should have access to this, with a clear third party Financial Oversight Committee, like we used to have...but again, not now.

Most commute in on Monday, leave Thursday, or Friday. They have more options for virtual work now. And if not mistaken, they in the past only got 1 day out of 15 days as credit for flying. Now they get more - that was proposed, not sure if it was finally enacted, but Tony can answer that.

Previous administrations always had 2 officers in the office most weeks. Ask committee volunteers how many times they came in the office with no officers. Never try to get anything done with our MEC on a Monday or Friday. I have witnessed that first hand when going in to get help on a contract issue, benefits issue, etc, and no one was in. Mid week. Not good. Several times answer was working from home, or just, not sure where they are.

Just because you got answers and are satisfied doesnt mean that issue wasn't put off way to long because of other things at the MEC..it was. Again, ask Tony C, he was a rep, as other long standing reps that are still around.

You and I pay their salaries, and I am allowed constructive critism. I saw SS and his negotiating guy spend less than 20 minutes on the HK 4 issue here in HK and they ran out and didn't mingle with anyone in HK. Left after an hour and 45 minutes. Those of us at that meeting didn't get answers on a lot of stuff. For instance, how long has this been a known issue at the MEC?...who are you negotiating with? What are our long term actions? Will you support a financial fund? (something we have done in the past)....no answers...just emails from management with after the fact responses from our leadership.

You say trust but verify, I have more than done that, I have witnessed it. You are the union, I am the union, I want transparency, honesty, and for us to support our members. I'm a President's club with ALPA PAC, and I doubt you have spent more time than me as a volunteer.

Catch Phrases. SS and this gang are the kings of catch-phrases...especially if it involves girls softball or soccer.

That is the problem right now - not enough people are holding their leaders accountable. They give weak answers and with little or no detail, and there is a reason why...there isn't much there.

There is a reason we had a 6 - 6 tie vote at the last officer elections...50% of the reps weren't happy. There wasn't unity. Why do you think there was a huge turnover recently? Why isn't there a Hong Kong Rep? 2 out of 3 here have resigned...

But you did use a well known tactic, you attacked the person asking the questions...

But lastly, you really need to ask yourself, why did they seek private counsel? (and it was more than 4 that did it, one very successfully) That is the really troubling question.

 

Maybe - just a guess - they sought private counsel for their civil court cases?

I'm pretty sure that all FDX ALPA can do is represent the 4 in the RLA/Arbitration process - can't represent them in State or Federal court.

Why would that be so troubling? It's the system that we are bound to work under.

Is FDX ALPA no longer representing them in the RLA Arbitration?

 

Civil is way down the road, and I would hope, not going to be required. Private counsel was retained for help in the current process. I can't answer about the arbitration and the private counsel involvement in that. Will ask the question though...good question.

 

There have been a lot of great contributions for support of the HK 4 from all corners of our industry.

Fr8DawgyDog, I beg some indulgence on my earlier rant, although I stand by it...frustration level out here is WAY high, and we want the honor and integrity of our fellow crewmembers returned, along with a global solution to this Housing Allowance mess.

I also agree unity amongst ourselves is foremost, despite extreme frustrations with a few in high places.

End rant and end air force sensitivity training...

Glad we had this little chat.

 

No worries. I defended DW and his admin on this board as well when I saw unsubstantiated statements being tossed around, even though I certainly didn't agree with their stances. I just don't see how attacking the honor and integrity of the MEC on this board (and I don't necessarily mean your posts) can help return the honor and integrity of our fellow crewmembers. Maybe I am wrong. At any rate I will leave this board to you and Tony C. I hope you have better luck effecting things here than those of us that lashed out against the original LOA that brought us all this crap in the first place. If that MEC had listened to us we wouldn't even be talking about this now. I appreciate your passion for the 4. Hope it all works out for everyone..

 

OK - just so I understand it correctly,

Lashing out against the MEC that brought us the original LOA was OK but lashing out against the current MEC (many members of which were in that original MEC) is just whining?

 

I said we lashed out against the LOA and it's provisions. I never called the work ethic or integrity of that MEC into question. Surely you can see the difference. On another thread it is apparent some do not understand how irony works. It looks to me like I need to stop wasting my time here. Hope it all works put for the 4. FDD out..