They are out there. I had a CA ask me when I was hired, I responded, he then stated that it was no wonder I cared about little jets and their outsourcing. Told me, sorry but anytime he can vote to increase his pay, he will, even at the price of scope.
I responded by telling him, I was glad he only had one vote.

Furthermore. We as a union need to get people in there that will not even agree to scope concessions much less bring them for a vote.

Boyd is one of the guys that will fight for scope tooth and nail..I ask who is running for LEC 44 Rep this fall??!!

I spoke shortly with Boyd this afternoon and will spend more time with him in the future on this issue. I also believe that Boyd Kelley will do a good job representing us, but he's only one small part of a large machine. I say exchange NOTHING for any additional slippage in scope. As one of the many pilots on the property that have been furloughed, I can tell you I would rather had had a strong SCOPE clause rather than furlough protection. Most of us that have been furlough believe that if the company wants to furlough, they will find a way to do it.

I hope you guys are able to elect representatives that feel strongly about this issue, as council 44 is the power center of our union. I will be a member of Council 44 in the not too distant future, but not in time to have a say.

Carl, that is not entirely correct. The MEC Chairman gets to vote to break ties. This almost always will occur during a normal "senatorial" vote as a tie during a roll call vote is statistically unlikely unless a rep splits their votes.

The power of the MEC chairman lies in being able to control the agenda of a meeting. At fNW the Policy Manual provided that any agenda items to be considered at a scheduled MEC meeting had to be 1) passed at a LEC meeting prior to the MEC meeting OR 2) Submitted by a LEC representative prior to a deadline OR 3) added to the meeting agenda (at any time) by the MEC Chairman.

The MEC Chaiman also controls in what order the agenda items are brought up at a meeting and, depending on the policy manual, controls which LEC reps sit on which subcommittees when they break to debate the merits of agenda items. At fNW and at the BOD, the voting reps are split into subgroups and are assigned a subset of agenda items to debate, amend and recommend/not recommend for passage when they return to the Plenary in front of the entire voting group.

Also at fNW, all of the Committee Chairmen were elected by the LEC reps. I have been told, but have not verified, that at DL all the committee chairmen are APPOINTED by the MEC Chairman.

The exception to this at fNW was the Negotiating Committee and sometimes the Merger Committee. Due to previous merger and seniority issues, all members of those committees were ELECTED by the NW LEC reps.

The MEC Chairman is also usually the one to rule on procedural challenges under Roberts Rules of Order as modified by the MEC Policy Manual.

An unscrupulous MEC Chairman could also choose to withhold important information from the LEC reps to influence their votes on certain issues.

I find that the current MEC lacks transparency on meeting minutes. The fNW LEC reps and Communications Committee would usually have bullet points/summary at the END OF EACH DAY of an OPEN MEC meeting and would disseminate those bullet points by email. Obviously if a meting is closed due to confidentiality, no information would be forthcoming.

RECALL is a serious business. My recommendations after being involved in one are:

1) Don't change horses in mid-stream. If you are in the middle of a difficult series of negotiations, its better to present a united front to management.

2) Don't recall unless you already have an ELECTABLE replacement ready to go at the next meeting. A failed recall is better than a successful one that leaves the MEC with no Chairman due to an inability to agree on a replacement.


SCOPE: I have been a SCOPE Nazi pretty much since I came off pilot probation. Gutting SCOPE is a BadIdea(tm). For those fDL that think otherwise, just remind them that SCOPE is the only reason DALPA had leverage to negotiate LOA19, pay raises and all...

"They are out there. I had a CA ask me when I was hired, I responded, he then stated that it was no wonder I cared about little jets and their outsourcing. Told me, sorry but anytime he can vote to increase his pay, he will, even at the price of scope."

Probably should have got off the trip, told the sked that you were unable to continue the trip with the ***hole. Let the chief pilot take care of it.

No, I see it as a challenge. Plus, he is entitled to his opinion, but I will spend four days poking holes all over it. It makes the time go by a bit quicker.

Carl, if that's the case and you guys were such scope "hawks", why did the merged pilot group inherit Compass? How many 76 seaters do Pinnacle and Mesaba fly?

Why did you go from 160 DC-9's to 60, and have 55 large RJ's at the merger, with no new narrowbody aircraft coming?

If Moak is _so_ bad, why isn't Dave Stevens our MEC Chairman? Or Ray Miller? Or Mark McClain? Why aren't Jim Van Sickle or Bob Hesselbein standing up?

Remember, as you said, the Chairman doesn't have a vote. He serves at the pleasure of the MEC. Moak was just elected January 17.

Delta has had split MEC's in the past. Any Rep is responsible for standing up for his constituents. Are you saying all the FNWA reps are too cowardly to do what they did on your MEC?

Right....:rolleyes:

Yeah, one. You don't know your history.

When you learn it, come back and explain what adding pilots to a seniority list when you don't own the flying they perform does for you...:eek:

Who are you referring to Slow?

What flying is not owned by who?

Adding a 76 seat airline when you don't own all 76 seat flying.

Compass brings 36 of the 141 76 seat aircraft currently flying in DCI.

If you can get _all_ the 76 seat flying, then bring them on board. Otherwise, you're just creating hostages to be whipsawed.