MOU 25-05
12-03-2025 | 10:04 AM
#1251
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 281
Even if it’s debated for a month before the vote closes, that doesn’t change anything. It still stands as what was voted on.
12-03-2025 | 10:17 AM
#1252
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,242
Likes: 702
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
12-03-2025 | 10:23 AM
#1253
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 281
12-03-2025 | 10:48 AM
#1254
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,242
Likes: 702
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
12-03-2025 | 11:11 AM
#1255
Leaves Biscoff crumbs
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 3,265
Likes: 941
From: Blue Juice Taste Tester
The problem here is not just a company problem. It’s a pilot/union problem. Every day pilots are getting screwed out of premium flying that rightfully should have been theirs. As long as the union allows this to continue, I have no problems with pilots short cutting short cut the process and make a deal with scheduling.
12-03-2025 | 11:22 AM
#1256
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 281
This is going to be an iterative process. The current status quo isn’t working. Let’s take a step forward and we can see the goods and others, how the company responds, and we fine tune it in Section 6. There’s the democracy you want.
12-03-2025 | 11:35 AM
#1257
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,436
Likes: 438
We did the democracy, it’s why we elect reps. It’s why we talk to our reps.
This is going to be an iterative process. The current status quo isn’t working. Let’s take a step forward and we can see the goods and others, how the company responds, and we fine tune it in Section 6. There’s the democracy you want.
This is going to be an iterative process. The current status quo isn’t working. Let’s take a step forward and we can see the goods and others, how the company responds, and we fine tune it in Section 6. There’s the democracy you want.
I don't think they believed it would pass, which is likely why it wasn't sent to MEMRAT. If they do things like this in closed session, what is talking to your reps going to do? You can provide all the input you want, but sometimes you have to see the language to make a decision. Instead they "had to vote it in, so we could see what was in it..." I would have voted no simply based on the fact there is no timeline to QS implementation and no real punishment attached to it not being implemented by X date. I don't see the no lookback for sick is a real motivator for them, some disagree with me for sure. It also should have been leveled with GS, again, some disagree.
12-03-2025 | 11:43 AM
#1258
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,242
Likes: 702
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
We did the democracy, it’s why we elect reps. It’s why we talk to our reps.
This is going to be an iterative process. The current status quo isn’t working. Let’s take a step forward and we can see the goods and others, how the company responds, and we fine tune it in Section 6. There’s the democracy you want.
This is going to be an iterative process. The current status quo isn’t working. Let’s take a step forward and we can see the goods and others, how the company responds, and we fine tune it in Section 6. There’s the democracy you want.
And why did the MOU announcement lead with “we didn’t write them into compliance?” Hmmmm
12-03-2025 | 11:48 AM
#1259
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 317
I don't think they believed it would pass, which is likely why it wasn't sent to MEMRAT. If they do things like this in closed session, what is talking to your reps going to do? You can provide all the input you want, but sometimes you have to see the language to make a decision. Instead they "had to vote it in, so we could see what was in it..." I would have voted no simply based on the fact there is no timeline to QS implementation and no real punishment attached to it not being implemented by X date. I don't see the no lookback for sick is a real motivator for them, some disagree with me for sure. It also should have been leveled with GS, again, some disagree.
12-03-2025 | 01:05 PM
#1260
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 281
I don't think they believed it would pass, which is likely why it wasn't sent to MEMRAT. If they do things like this in closed session, what is talking to your reps going to do? You can provide all the input you want, but sometimes you have to see the language to make a decision. Instead they "had to vote it in, so we could see what was in it..." I would have voted no simply based on the fact there is no timeline to QS implementation and no real punishment attached to it not being implemented by X date. I don't see the no lookback for sick is a real motivator for them, some disagree with me for sure. It also should have been leveled with GS, again, some disagree.
I think it would’ve passed in memrat. We’ll never know for sure. There was ALOT of push on the reps to get something done.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
