Our attorneys are paid to identify risks, and they do a very good job of it.


They are not paid to make strategic decisions.


Our MEC is paid to make strategic decisions, and ... well, if every decision is to avoid all risk and to be nice to The Company ...






The problem is not the attorneys.






.

Jury duty summons....
 

Here's an important update....

nypost.com/2014/04/17/dog-summoned-for-jury-duty-in-new-jersey/

Just a humorous input on a serious subject.....the jury summons issue needs a good review by all FDX'ers. Just trying to lower the heat on the stove.....

Just notified of "call-in" jury duty for the month of August...
I spoke with the Union who confirmed that all of my trips in August would be dropped and I would have to pick up extra flying over my regular line credit during the next three months to "build up funds" to make up the 50% pay difference for any days that I am not asked to show up at court per Contract Section 25.Y.3.b...My paycheck on November 15th will potentially be $5,000 short....
I didn't vote for this contract, and I hope no one ever says "my Union speaks for me" again...I can't believe this language was ever agreed to. It is ludicrous.

It wasn't the contract, this was a settlement agreement.

Which doesn't make it any less offensive and demonstrably wrong...
I am selected to do my civic duty, and am punished by having my pay cut in half while those who are selected to show up at court for the exact same job are compensated at 100%?...How would the Union negotiators respond if some were paid their full salary while others were paid half their salary?...
If this is a settlement then the Union needs to take responsibility for their failure to negotiate a rational settlement and set up a fund from the thousands of dollars each of us pay in dues to cover this and similar situations where the Company negotiators clearly won.

Half Truth! It was a GIVE AWAY by the union outside negotiations and then adopted into the most recent contract. Either way it was concessionary.

I share your frustration. I protested loudly to my Block Rep, my Local Council Reps, and the MEC Officers. My Block Rep told me he had never been called for Jury Duty, so it didn't matter to him as much as other things at the time.



I was selected for Jury Duty the very next month. :mad:


What amazed me was the genesis of the Grievance was The Company not abiding by the terms of the CBA, and the solution was to relieve them of some of their obligations. Boggles. The. Mind.






.

certainly it was concessionary, but blaming it on the last contract is wrong. Nobody had renegotiate the jury duty settlement as a top ten issue. And once it was settled it is the contract.

That never happens to my cousin Boudreaux. After one minute of voir dire, both attorneys move to strike him for cause, and the judge asks what took them so long. :D

Originally Posted by YYESIAV8 https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/i...s/viewpost.gif

OK, are you saying our staff attorneys are (for lack of a better term) weak?


Maybe the former MEC members here can give us their insight on them.

Not a MEC member but here are my thoughts:

I think they have no skin in the game as they have a job for life and the lack of a fight for the CBA or the resulting rulings do not effect them at all. Think about it the attorneys get to basically decide if they fight a CBA issue and in my experience they always want a slam dunk. I know the MEC can tell them to fight it anyway but how many times does that happen? I have voiced this to several MEC reps unless we fight the company on more issues regarding CBA interpretations the company will simply keep chipping away.
I understand controlling costs but the fixed cost of the lawyers salary is always there and that is the rub. Our lawyers get paid the same regardless so why would they want to work harder?