SluggoC17

Council 44 pilots,

Yesterday, you received a Council 44 update from your two captain representatives critical of our actions at the last MEC special meeting. While it’s only natural to want to respond point by point, we believe that would serve no productive purpose, but we do feel obligated to offer you some general insight.

The primary complaint seems to center on the fact we caucused with some representatives while excluding others. For those unfamiliar with the MEC process, caucusing basically means we spoke, debated, and, in this case, came to a consensus with other representatives on negotiating parameters while not in formal session (in this case, with 10 of the other voting representatives). This happens all the time (the caucusing part, not the consensus part—that’s a little less frequent). Further, it is not at all unusual to “cross-caucus” from one council to the next. Ideally, representatives within each council agree on direction. Sometimes, they do not. Welcome to democracy.

Let us be clear—there were no policy manual violations, no by-law violations, and no violations of Robert’s Rules of Order. Everyone maintained their vote (your representation), and full parliamentary privileges were honored throughout the meeting.

What we are really witnessing is frustration in action, and unfortunately, it’s on full display for all to see. The frustration of bankruptcy, the frustration of lost pensions, the frustration of furloughs, the frustration of ongoing concessions, the frustration of merger integration, the frustration of a rejected TA, the frustration of watching billions being spent on stock buybacks and dividends, the frustration of excessive management compensation, the frustration of being the only employee group not made whole since bankruptcy, the frustration of watching management drag its feet in negotiations, and the frustration of broken promises to “the world’s best pilots” has all found its way to the MEC. Unfortunately, human nature sometimes makes it easier to take out our frustrations in the wrong direction.

Both of us ran on an “outsider” platform. Neither of us is a politician. We can’t boast of a decade in ALPA office. We are line pilots, just like you. We have no higher aspiration than to serve you and bring home a contract we can all be proud of. We have not wavered from our campaign promises to you. You have exactly the same two F/O reps you voted for.

It is our sincere hope and expectation that the MEC will focus its energies exclusively on securing the contract you deserve. Please feel free to call or e-mail us if you have any questions.

vyperdriver

That's all i need to know. Stick to your guns, represent your constituency accurately and vigorously, that's all we can ask. Be above board, keep us informed and call it how you see it.

BobZ

thought so.

they had enough of the clown show. Almost enough to make me want to downbid in support.

kobaracing1

At least there was a little passion in the Buzz character's rant. The Sam and Scott grasping at straws communication was a big thumbs down, riding the CVG coat tails, imo. This ATL FO explaination was not even necessary for any constituent with a little life experience, much less business or politics. Glad I'm not in ATL, and disappointed I haven't read any well written fiction from the SEA Chairman.

Nothing more than a hissy fit by someone in CVG that didn't get his way, again. Then goes public with an exaggerated story of getting beat up by 12 thugs. Now he wants his posse to get even with his enemies. The bully got bullied.

A normal 12 vs 7 dynamic, except that one CVG guy doesn't like being a minority. The T Omalley version of this succeeded in getting their way because of a concerted infiltration of councils by the 'proactive management' apologists post merger. The TA2015 smackdown changed the MEC landscape and the top down bullies are not liking their position these days. It seems while everyone's eye is on the TA2016 ball, it may be reversing again.

Sep 1st may be a bust, but never underestimate the underdog. And look out NYC, you got some carpetbaggers comin into town. At second glance, the CVG whiner's letter may be the first step in a campaign to get the 12-7 numbers reversed. If I were dal mgt and wanted the old dalpa back, I'd gamble and wait it out.

I've got 2 years to go. Should be enough time to see the end of the show.

Bucking Bar

So what are the differences in their positions?

Frustration, while understandable, does not tell me anything. Is this a difference in opinion on retirement, or scope, or pay? Who knows?

kobaracing1

Oh, I forgot.

This is about the best possible pwa for dal pilots... not debating the process and dalpa politics.

Bucking Bar

Well, yes. I'm interested in career progression, quality of life and money.

There will always be politics and politicians. I am more interested in what this job earns me than watching a latin soap opera which only casts middle-aged white men. naranja o equipos pasión, ¿por qué diablos no hay tortilla Staion en el desayuno ?


Without P2P we are left to using web boards and a sort of coconut telegraph with whoever's best friend's, squadron mate's, cousin, heard about Ferrris Bueller at the 31 flavors last Saturday. Maybe you don't need the $40k-$60k a year we're leaving on the table, but it would make a difference in our house. Especially if actions as severe as recalls are being postulated, we need more detail to determine where the substantiative differences lay.

The same group of Delta pilots elected our Captain and our FO Reps. The polling should be an accurate cross section (there are more FO's). So why this degree of separation?

Ryan S. is correct that this sort of exclusive caucusing has happened in the past, but I do not recall it happened in the lead up to rejected TA-15. More often it was used to deliver a fait accompli on a controversial provision of "constructive engagement" and while the fix was in, it was usually delivered skillfully with deference to the appearance of a democratic process and inclusive governance. There is a reason why that approach was better ... unity matters in negotiations. The old school majority played nice and the old school minority sucked it up in the interest of the common good.

So what we've done here (and the minority deserves equal blame) is communicated to management that our negotiating team really does not have the power to make a deal. So management is doing what they always do in such instances and holding back.

The NMB will do what they often do, particularly during election season, set the parking brake. Ain't gonna be no labor disruptions during a Presidential election. After that, there will always be a reason to delay - being decisive is not a trait shared by any long time Washington D.C. administrators.

Both sides venting their frustration might feel good, but we are moving backward, not forward towards anyone's agenda.

Probably the only effective way forward is a re-set. The minority needs to engage and get on board with the majority. The majority needs to show greater discipline and be inclusive.

A terrorist is someone who blows things up when they don't get their way. We should always work very hard to ensure that term never remotely describes our actions.

Timbo

From what I've been able to gather, the 'Difference' between the 7 and the 12 is in the negotiating strategy. The 7 are of the opinion we must trade more concessions for any increases on our side of the ledger (see AIP's), regardless of line pilot input saying NO MORE CONCESSIONS!

The 12 are trying to represent the input from the line pilots, which is saying they (we) will not vote yes for these AIP's or any more concessions.

Then there's the retirement issue. The 7 say there's just no way to restore it. The 12 are saying we have to do something to try to restore it.

We basically have the same 65/35 split from the last TA, and if the next one looks like a polished up 2015 turd, it will suffer the same fate.

kobaracing1

And the remote is no where to be found
Touché.

Tanker1497

Maybe a little over the top comparing our negotiations to terrorism? I call it democracy. Those in the minority can choose to contribute, but there's a reason they're the...minority. You call it backwards movement, I believe you're correct. For me, it's movement away from another self funded, concession filled, get'er done quicky TA.