![]() |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 3533613)
Start with the quarterly and annual reports. We are about ⅓ of the total employee expenses.
|
MC from 66 sent an email explaining his votes. This part is interesting to me. DH brings an approach that will get us across the finish line in Section 6 in a timely manner,…
Timely and successful TAs haven’t happened in a long time. I don’t know much about either of the candidates that got votes. I’m part of 66, but have never met my reps. To me TK has seemed ok from his com emails. I do think MC’s vote is questionable. The pilots that elected TK to represent them probably would have wanted him to be the MEC chair too. Even with my doubts about our new MEC chairman, I think it is too soon to recall reps. Save the hammer for when/if they deliver an unsatisfactory TA. |
Originally Posted by CBreezy
(Post 3533610)
If these conversations happened behind closed doors, it's pretty disrespectful for them to be leaked. I want reps who aren't afraid to be a dissenting voice behind closed doors as long as the right decision is eventually made. So maybe he wanted to wait? Maybe he wanted to do it earlier? It's all irrelevant because he eventually voted for it. You know his opponent voted no on? LOA 20-04. Imagine if we had true dissenting voices during the TA1 fiasco.
|
Originally Posted by Trip7
(Post 3533245)
The MEC Chair does not provide direction to the NC….the MEC does
And imho that is why the MEC Chair is the most powerful person in that room and the most in charge of the NC. |
Originally Posted by Vsop
(Post 3533627)
MC from 66 sent an email explaining his votes. This part is interesting to me. DH brings an approach that will get us across the finish line in Section 6 in a timely manner,…
Timely and successful TAs haven’t happened in a long time. I don’t know much about either of the candidates that got votes. I’m part of 66, but have never met my reps. To me TK has seemed ok from his com emails. I do think MC’s vote is questionable. The pilots that elected TK to represent them probably would have wanted him to be the MEC chair too. Even with my doubts about our new MEC chairman, I think it is too soon to recall reps. Save the hammer for when/if they deliver an unsatisfactory TA. Really need more info. |
Originally Posted by DisMyGamerTag
(Post 3533642)
However, the MEC does not run for the coveted big money ALPA President job… the MEC Chair does.
And imho that is why the MEC Chair is the most powerful person in that room and the most in charge of the NC. |
Originally Posted by DeltaboundRedux
(Post 3533330)
Feel much the same way.
This is not a popular opinion on this board, however. (To be fair, if I had a de facto monopoly on GS and extra days off, I wouldn't want that contract sniping loop to disappear either. ) |
Originally Posted by Vsop
(Post 3533627)
MC from 66 sent an email explaining his votes. This part is interesting to me. DH brings an approach that will get us across the finish line in [color=black]Section 6 in a timely manner,…
Since the early 2000's the company has only closed bases, not opened them. They kept CVG open FOREVER because the LEC was notorious for providing the company with HAZZARDOUS yes votes when needed. The company would like to open VB's but that is another massive abrogation of seniority in and of itself. With something like 50% DH pay, this will really incentivize the company to deadhead pilots all over the place to staff airports that are likely already FA bases. If one thinks they are getting slingshot across the system now chasing IROPS, just wait until it only costs half as much! If the company is parking something like DH, then they see massive gains. |
Originally Posted by JustNarced
(Post 3533696)
We have to be careful with some of these smaller changes. For example, everyone cites how much of a win TA2 was, but TA2 also changed the callout ladder and ushered in the reroute fiasco the domestic side deals with today. A small change, massive impacts. And if you are one of the junior to mid-pack NB-A's that bid down to WB-B over the loss of QOL then that subtle change may have cost you financially.
Since the early 2000's the company has only closed bases, not opened them. They kept CVG open FOREVER because the LEC was notorious for providing the company with HAZZARDOUS yes votes when needed. The company would like to open VB's but that is another massive abrogation of seniority in and of itself. With something like 50% DH pay, this will really incentivize the company to deadhead pilots all over the place to staff airports that are likely already FA bases. If one thinks they are getting slingshot across the system now chasing IROPS, just wait until it only costs half as much! If the company is parking something like DH, then they see massive gains. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 3533613)
Start with the quarterly and annual reports. We are about ⅓ of the total employee expenses.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:29 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands