|
|
Eh, WHUT ? Slowplay's taking FTB's job !!! Who recalled FTB!!!
Where's his "Bid Fools" sign? ------------------ 80Knots, Your post kinda touches on this whole ALPA web board issue as well. Individual MECs have broad autonomy to deal with the problems of their pilots. They can make errors, and occasionally do make errors. But who gets held responsible? Individuals, acting in their individual capacities get in trouble also. But if it is on an ALPA web board, guess who has the potential responsibility? Through bankruptcy and our merger the Delta MEC operated in a very high threat environment. They avoided getting themselves,or ALPA in trouble. KUDOS for us. Other pilots have not been so fortunate. IMHO is unfair for the TWA pilots' MEC to take action and then sue ALPA National for the result of the actions they, themselves, authorized. As for USAPA; ALPA was the bargaining agent and the US MEC was calling the shots through the arbitration decided in June 2007, which led to the decertification in April 2008. The vote was less than 250 pilots in favor of USAPA. The then MEC Chair., Jack Stephan said it well: "As an ALPA volunteer for nearly 20 years I have witnessed firsthand how ALPA has helped individual pilots by saving their careers and by saving lives. It’s going to be extremely difficult for me personally and professionally to watch what happens to this pilot group now," said Stephan. "Industry consolidation is inevitable, and the economy is slowing. I believe that these challenges will be too much to ask of an untested, under-funded union." |
LEC election results are in....
|
80Knots,
Here's a blog post descriptive of the struggles the IAM is having with similar decisions.
Originally Posted by Leeham
The vote of IAM 751 membership on the Boeing contract proposal is Wednesday, and over the weekend, some disturbing details emerged in the non-stop coverage locally.
The Seattle Times’ Dominic Gates reports that it’s now clear there is a schism between the IAM International HQ in “the Other Washington” and the IAM 751 local leadership. Readers will recall that last Thursday, Tom Wroblewski, president of the local, dramatically called the proposed contract, containing substantial take-aways (as local membership calls it), “crap” and tore up the agreement. It was entirely a symbolic move; the International decreed the vote would proceed as planned. For someone who purportedly helped negotiate the agreement, this was odd behavior, to say the least. With Gates’ reporting, it now appears there is far more to the back story than meets the eye. The 751 media team has been put on ice by International, and all media calls (including ours) are now referred to the International. The local leadership isn’t making statements to the press; it was an International official who spoke with Gates. It’s now pretty clear that International is driving this train, apparently by-passing the local leadership in crafting this contract extension. The question is, “why?” What’s in it for the International to negotiate an agreement that has so split the local membership? Whatever the outcome, Boeing comes up a winner. If it gets contract approval, it has a divided IAM 751 membership. If the contract isn’t approved, it has a divided membership and a free hand to take the 777X to Charleston, where the 787 is also assembled, to Texas, where it has a facility, to Utah, where it has another operation (and all of which are right-to-work states), or an option to take another crack at reaching an agreement here. In any case, it’s clear there is a split between the IAM 751 and the IAM International, and this can only benefit Boeing. Gates’ Sunday reporting includes some language that, for a family newspaper, is pretty unusual. Coupled with Wroblewski’s “crap” and Sunday’s reporting, not since the days of President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky detailed an entirely new use for cigars has mainstream reporting been so graphic. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1517102)
Interesting that one of the most vocal about how we took the first offer, caved and all of that is now saying that a group that followed his ideal plan and got hosed was somehow idiotic. Just amazing....
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1517089)
The AirTran MEC did what every keyboard commando on this message board and most others always advocates--they "voted NO!!!" they "showed them who's boss" they "didn't cave" blah blah blah.
Yeah, that makes sense. |
Originally Posted by newKnow
(Post 1514818)
What our Constitution authorizes the federal government to do has been debated since its ratification.
But, for us, I think it's important to keep in mind that the Constitution came about because the Articles of Confederation (AOF) were too weak. Back then, they had people who wanted the Constitution to specifically enumerate what was authorized, and they had people who felt it was to be left open to interpretation. But, I think if you look back at it, most of the Founders and Justices of our past thought this was neither possible, or practical. Even the Founders who vehemently opposed the open ended interpretation of the Constitution that gave the Federal Government power, and felt they must be specifically defined, acted otherwise once they were in office. Otherwise, that whole Louisiana Purchase thing wouldn't have occurred. I think when the Constitution was ratified, they were just trying to make things work and pay the bills and it didn't really make sense to have a state law -- if it conflicted with a federal law -- to be on the same level. It would have been the AOF all over again. So, in my opinion, the judicial activist you speak of were some very smart men who did a lot to keep this country together. One of the first was Chief Justice John Marshall. His opinions on the Court probably did just as much to shape and maybe even save this country as anyone. So, long story short. I think the priority is: 1.) U.S. Constitution 2.) U.S. Federal law 3.) U.S. Treaty 4.) Executive Agreement 5.) State law One of the best Court cases to figure out the reasonings behind the Supremacy Clause is called McCulloch v. Maryland. Check it out and let me know what you think. :D New K No one disputes the supremacy of a valid federal law within the federal government's extremely limited scope of costitutional power. The issue is the unlimited overreach permitted through judicial activism and sophistry, rarely checked or balanced and when it is, only by the overreaching entity itself. The EPA has basically decreed, with the blessing of the courts, that carbon dioxide can be regulated without restriction as a federal power. When you speak you exhale carbon dioxide, so if 5/9 justices said the EPA can regulate free speech using that as a technicality, would that be a binding law in your opinion? Don't forget that the entire document is predicated on self evident natural rights that supersede anything a judicial avtivist wordsmith can rubber stamp. |
Originally Posted by TheManager
(Post 1517055)
Copied from another thread:
Ruling just posted. Arbitrator rejects every aspect of the ALPA argument regarding the B717 sub-lease to Delta. My personal favorite is from page 46: Nonetheless, all that evidence shows is that ALPA gambled wrong in the first SLI Agreement when it rejected the terms of the Agreement in the hope of extracting more favorable terms from the Company. When Southwest responded with what ALPA considered a draconian “take it or leave it” offer, ALPA wound up with little leverage to negotiate terms in the second SLI Agreement. Here come more lawsuits. |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1517534)
Are you honestly attempting to equate Air Tran's acquisition to our contract leverage?
So....since the Air Tran MEC said "no," the Delta MEC should say "yes" to every first offer? Yeah, that makes sense. There are examples of NO votes being absolutely appropriate. The same applies to YES votes, however. And vice versa. I'm guessing you voted no on the last agreement here at DAL. So long as you read the agreement, and concluded that it warranted a no vote, you have my respect. I just know that there are guys who will always vote no--and for that matter, others who will always vote yes--before they have read the first word of any agreement. We all need to be more accountable to ourselves than that. |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 1517531)
LEC election results are in....
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1517581)
... and the results are ?
Buzz and Ryan in cvg (both won by about the same margin against the write in) Crane and Gaddis in SEA. |
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1517590)
Brielmann and Hazelton in NYC
Buzz and Ryan in cvg (both won by about the same margin against the write in) Crane and Gaddis in SEA. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:42 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands