Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
Well said! I am surprised there isn't a bigger uproar over potentially flying pilots more hours. I know there are some that like flying more than being at home. I am not one of those people. Being away from home, family, events and sleeping in hotels for even 10 days a month (the more the worse) really jacks with trying to live a normal life.
Adding more potential forced flying is a no vote for me. The flip side of that, if there is language guaranteeing that I can bid for example a 50 hour schedule or take more days off on reserve when I need to then I might be ok with language allowing those who love to fly a million hours a year do their thing as well.
Money is important but what I want to see is more money while still living a half way normal life with my family and maintaining some semblance of health, circadian rhythm, family life etc.
The negotiating committee is headed the wrong way in my opinion.
Actually Jack, it's the MEC bureaucrats that are headed in the wrong direction. They run the union. The negotiating committee just runs the strategy set forth by the MEC bureaucrats. Our biggest problem is that our reps are routinely ignored and "mushroomed" by the MEC bureaucrats when our reps' opinions don't align with theirs.
Our reps are going to have a damn tough time with this. They'll be faced with knowing the MEC bureaucrats went off on their own
again, and wondering whether punishing them for it is worth keeping pay increases away from the pilots they represent until the wrongs have been righted. This will be a much easier vote for our reps if they know we have
THEIR backs if they vote this down and tell the MEC bureaucrats to pay F'N attention this time!
Carl