Wake Up - Seattle LEC Election
 

If you want a new contract it's important to have adults in the room that know a good deal when they see one.

3 of the 4 rep candidates can do this. The incumbent Blankenship has shown he cannot be trusted to do so.

He was the ONLY First Officer Rep to vote against LOA 20-04. If you don't remember, 20-04 provided furlough protection for UNA's.

He was against protecting these pilots' jobs. Now he's hoping you won't remember.

By all appearances he is an entrenched DALPA insider that votes the way he's told. His handlers are censoring any attempt to present the real story on the C54 Facebook page and I assume they will be along here shortly to shout this down.

Read for yourself and share with other SEA-based pilots:

c54election.com

LOA 20-04 not only mitigated the furlough of 1941 of our fellow union brothers and sisters but it also reduced the green slip trigger to the lesser of 72 hrs or the ALV - 5 (whichever is less) and permanently reduced the TLV to 73-78 hours improving the quality of life and/or advancement opportunities for most every pilot on the seniority list. It is difficult to comprehend how Blankenship would think he has earned our support for another term after voting against the interests of the pilots he was elected to represent.

Seriously how many threads do you need on the same subject…the website is an anonymous sham.

Feel free to merge them. The other was started because this was not published.

One is enough to shine some light on the record.

Anything factually incorrect with the website?

Or you just don’t like anyone questioning your candidate’s record?

It wasn’t immediately published because your account was started yesterday (22 Oct). There are moderation requirements for new users… I’m surprised you didn’t know that with your obvious acumen for HTML and building websites.

it’s just silly how there’s next to no information about any other candidate on “election watch”. Yawn.

So we can file that under no objections to the facts on the website?

Sure. File it wherever you want.

I guess I’m just trying to figure out the issue you have with our current rep when compared with the other candidate.

I mean, even the platform she’s running on is ridiculous: “I agree with everything our current rep believes, and would have voted the same way he did—even on LOA 20-03 and 20-04—given the feedback received from constituents. I just happened to have been a UNA and didn’t like it.”

Seriously… that’s the platform: Disdain for voting against an LOA that she, herself, said she would have voted the same way for if in his shoes given the feedback received from his constituents.

Let me repeat this: She wants to tout that she doesn’t like his vote, yet would have voted the same way? Seriously—does that make sense?

The other candidate (MJ) has no experience on our MEC and no understanding of our current contract negotiations, as she hasn’t been a part of any DALPA committee in her short career at DAL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Troll! Nothing to see here…just move along. Another drive by attack. Don’t waste your time reading this garbage thread. Call your SEA reps and let them speak for themselves and answer any questions you might have.

The issue is not this one particularly poor decision to vote no to an obvious yes.

It’s that he won’t be able to make the right call when faced with a similar situation. I’m sure WB is a very nice guy. He has shown himself to be too easily influenced.

It’s always the safe play to say you deserved more. LOA 20-04 was one of the rare, obvious yes votes and he couldn’t even get there.

How long will he hold up your new PWA because he’s scared to explain his yes?