FDX Pilots - Disciplined, Fined, or Expelled
 

No, I'm not talking about management, I'm talking about a FedEx pilot using Article VIII of ALPA's Constitution & By-Laws against fellow FedEx pilots. :(


At last October's ALPA Board of Directors Meeting, the BOD elected 4 national officers, including one of our own FedEx pilots to the position of First Vice President. Having representation at such a high level in the national organization is a huge win for FedEx pilots, an advantage that cannot be overstated.


Recently, the Chairman of Local Council 26, the Block 11 (Instructors) Representative, used Article VIII of ALPA's Constitution & By-Laws to prefer charges against our First Vice President, the man who served as his "campaign manager", and 5 sitting members of our MEC -- that is, 5 of our Block Reps.

Here's an excerpt of Article VIII:


At today's Joint Council meeting, I asked the charging member, the Chairman of Council 26, to explain to us what remedy he sought (discipline, fine, or expulsion), what act the charged pilots had committed, and how this action improves our unity, or enhances our ability to successfully negotiate a CBA under the supervision of the NMB. The MEC won't even eat dinner together -- how can they be working together to serve the pilots of FedEx?


He was reluctant to speak at all, but I pointed out that nothing in Article VIII requires secrecy or confidentiality, and appealed to him as an elected ALPA officer that he owes an explanation to the dues-paying FedEx ALPA members.


His response requires little summarizing, as it was already brief. He claims that he did not personally charge anybody, they should not consider it an attack by him, that he was basically acting on behalf of another member (who, by the way is not in his Domicile, much less his Council), he was a mere conduit to a legal procedure. Finally, he said that his attorney would not allow him to say more.



I wonder ... if he's merely acting as a mindless conduit, devoid of judgment or discretion, why does he need an attorney?


Is this the example of unity we're expected to emulate?






.

What??? How much longer before March 01 comes? :mad:

Wait a minute, our ALPA By-Laws allow someone to prefer charges against members without actually stating what the charges are? Then say "I preferred charges against our 1st VP and 5 members of the MEC but I didn't personally charge them so we're all good"? This is bizarre I've read Tony's post three times and I'm still not sure exactly what happened.

Only thing that's clear is that it's not helpful when we're deep in contract negotiations.

Perhaps my block rep, or one of the P to P folks can explain what this is all about?

I won't hold my breath.

If P to P reps don't have the answer, what are they good for?

Precisely.

Every time I ask one of them to tell me something I don't know, they don't know either.

They aren't good for anything, that I can tell.

Well I guess my current block 11 rep has gone the way of BM. Current block 11 rep files against a great guy like Joe D and anybody with a brain knows who the real douche bag is! Cant wait until he follows the likes of LK, BM and PC into flight management. :-(

I am in total agreement with Tony concerning this matter. I also attended yesterday's joint council meeting and the Block 11 reps response to Tony's questions were a joke. I thought I was listing to reruns of the Watergate hearings... On the advice of council I can not comment....please give us a break. First off, this Art 8 filing is not common but it is also not abnormal. Secondly, it is an administrative matter not a criminal matter. It is the first we have had here at FedEx that I'm aware of. So most members don't know what to make of it. Thirdly,now that the Art 8 has been filed it is offical Union business and we have a right to know. I fault the MEC leadership for not getting out in front of this and keeping the membership informed.

Now that it has been filed we must all wait for this administrative matter to conclude.For us, the membership, we must stay laser focused on the contract and how management is dealing with us. We must also hold the MEC acountable for how they work with us and for us. There is more to being a member than just "staying informed". If you are unhappy about how this played out, talk with your block and find out how to make positive changes.

In unity, the ATM

I shake my head when I learn of some new, stupid action or remark from some of our national elected officials. But I tell my friends that if those officials got run over tomorrow, there would be others that think just like them to take their place. So the take-away is that the people that vote these people in are the ones ultimately responsible. The electorate has to pay attention in the front end and then hold their reps accountable while they are in office.Where is the outrage from the members of this clowns Council?

I don't know what is going on in our MEC and who is suing who and why. But I suspect most people who are not in the MEC don't know either. So you have to ask yourself, why would the block 11 guy go through the trouble(looks like lots of trouble for him)to charge these guys, if he didn't have a very good reason. Sounds like it would be a very nasty self inflicted wound. Apparently he's not talking, but I suspect the MEC guys being charged with article 8 must have done something to be charged. I don't think the MEC lives in a vacuum. Either way, it's a bad deal for us! We're in the middle of negotiations and these guys apparently can't get along. Got to shake my head.