Notices

Tattletale Tuesday

Old 01-27-2017 | 06:02 PM
  #131  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 21
Default

Originally Posted by newKnow
Trip,


When did you get hired and how did the merger affect you?

Speaking of track records? How long have you been following B. Bartells union work and did what he did ever effect you negatively?
to answer your question...he was hired less than 3 years ago.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 06:04 PM
  #132  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 21
Default

Originally Posted by Trip7
Of course I support him now he's the MEC Chair. How he got the votes is an internal C44 issue that hopefully 44 get cleaned up but now that he's there I hope he is successful. This really is about 44 being properly represented. The FO reps don't make the cut IMO. C44 peeps ask around. Plenty of folks who voted no to TA1 and oppose the old guard want the FO reps gone ASAP
all the people i converse with on a normal basis in C44 say the FO reps are the best they have ever seen and voted against the recall.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 06:10 PM
  #133  
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Trip7
Of course I support him now he's the MEC Chair. How he got the votes is an internal C44 issue that hopefully 44 get cleaned up but now that he's there I hope he is successful. This really is about 44 being properly represented. The FO reps don't make the cut IMO. C44 peeps ask around. Plenty of folks who voted no to TA1 and oppose the old guard want the FO reps gone ASAP
That last sentence doesn't jibe with the reality. If the FO reps are gone, the old guard and TA1 lovers return. Are you sure you know what's really going on here? I don't mean that in a negative way.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 06:10 PM
  #134  
Trip7's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,200
Likes: 262
Default

Originally Posted by gzsg
What is the track record for the Moakies who begged and cried and threatened for TA 1? Hermon and Nestor and Hanson?
Not very good. Track record of the current Capt Reps....excellent

Originally Posted by Check Essential
You couldn't be more wrong.
There's no way we are going back to the Moakist regime.
Curly and his buddies will just have to live with Bartels.

The old gang has always been able to stack ATL LEC meetings.
A council-wide vote is a whole different ball game.
Johnson and Kern will win in a landslide.
Why would we be going back to the old gang? Almost all are Captains. C44 currently has 2 solid, well respected Capt Reps that are not remotely old guard. Even gzsg endorsed them. I'll gladly take two more moderates like then as FO reps.

Originally Posted by Elliot
I've flown with Trip7. He's a gentleman and a scholar, in addition to being a fine pilot!
Thanks, same can be said right back at you. It was a pleasure although it was a quick trip.

Originally Posted by Wuzatforus
That last sentence doesn't jibe with the reality. If the FO reps are gone, the old guard and TA1 lovers return. Are you sure you know what's really going on here? I don't mean that in a negative way.
Where are these "old guard" FOs coming from? Even they exist how will they win an election when you have two Moderate Captain reps with what appears to be very high approval rating in C44?

Last edited by Trip7; 01-27-2017 at 06:36 PM.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 06:40 PM
  #135  
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Trip7
Not very good. Track record of the current Capt Reps....excellent



Why would we be going back to the old gang? Almost all are Captains. C44 currently has 2 solid, well respected Capt Reps that are not remotely old guard. Even gzsg endorsed them. I'll gladly take two more moderates like then as FO reps.



Thanks, same can be said right back at you. It was a pleasure although it was a quick trip.



Where are these "old guard" FOs coming from? Even they exist how will they win an election when you have two Moderate Captain reps with what appears to be very high approval rating in C44?
By what means are you measuring their "high approval ratings".
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 06:52 PM
  #136  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 21
Default

Originally Posted by Wuzatforus
By what means are you measuring their "high approval ratings".
his own...
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 07:56 PM
  #137  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 0
Default

The recalls after TA1 were a mistake. TA2 was a result of United's and other's increased payrates and the fact that TA1 was voted down 65-35. By default, the only way TA2 could go was higher. TA2 was achieved in spite of the new LEC reps, not because of them. Malone and the NC were the primary architects of TA2. An NC selected by the original reps from TA1.

Some people thought it a good idea to recall a rep because they went against the will of the membership in a 65-35 vote against a TA. These same people now think it's wrong to recall a rep because they went against the will of the membership in a 82-18 vote for a TA.

Hypocrites.

But, despite my misgivings of the 44 FO reps I think the second recall is a mistake too. It seems petty. And if they survive the vote they will be that much stronger. That won't help those looking for moderate replacements when the time comes to negotiate the next TA.

But the dye is cast.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 08:43 PM
  #138  
80ktsClamp's Avatar
Da Hudge
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Default

Originally Posted by ERflyer
The recalls after TA1 were a mistake. TA2 was a result of United's and other's increased payrates and the fact that TA1 was voted down 65-35. By default, the only way TA2 could go was higher. TA2 was achieved in spite of the new LEC reps, not because of them. Malone and the NC were the primary architects of TA2. An NC selected by the original reps from TA1.

Some people thought it a good idea to recall a rep because they went against the will of the membership in a 65-35 vote against a TA. These same people now think it's wrong to recall a rep because they went against the will of the membership in a 82-18 vote for a TA.

Hypocrites.

But, despite my misgivings of the 44 FO reps I think the second recall is a mistake too. It seems petty. And if they survive the vote they will be that much stronger. That won't help those looking for moderate replacements when the time comes to negotiate the next TA.

But the dye is cast.

Nope. When reps shout down and full on insult the members they are supposed to represent in an attempt to sell an unprecedented failure of a TA, that is the time for a recall.

This recall is a farce and nothing but a power grab... the recalls post the failed TA were appropriate. You don't mess up to that level without being brought to task. I won't be voting for JJ if he runs again due to his bumblings, but a recall is completely inappropriate here.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 09:37 PM
  #139  
newKnow's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
Default

Originally Posted by ERflyer
The recalls after TA1 were a mistake. TA2 was a result of United's and other's increased payrates and the fact that TA1 was voted down 65-35. By default, the only way TA2 could go was higher. TA2 was achieved in spite of the new LEC reps, not because of them. Malone and the NC were the primary architects of TA2. An NC selected by the original reps from TA1.

Some people thought it a good idea to recall a rep because they went against the will of the membership in a 65-35 vote against a TA. These same people now think it's wrong to recall a rep because they went against the will of the membership in a 82-18 vote for a TA.

Hypocrites.

But, despite my misgivings of the 44 FO reps I think the second recall is a mistake too. It seems petty. And if they survive the vote they will be that much stronger. That won't help those looking for moderate replacements when the time comes to negotiate the next TA.

But the dye is cast.
ER,

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. The round of recalls from 2015 went down because the reps we had were in an untenable position. Much from their own doing.

1.) The way they rolled out TA15 was piece meal, misleading, secretive, and deceptive. (By the way, Malone's Administration did the exact opposite. My hat's off to them.)

2.) By the end of the voting period, we had gotten to the point when the "old guard" was in a position where they were threatening to sue member's (some of them on here) for liable and slander.


Personally, I can give you a number of reasons why I felt betrayed as to how they rolled that piece of crap out. Starting with a 25 minute discussion I had with a PTP rep in JFK ops and finishing with the braggadocios claim that they got us 3:30 vacation pay only having to find out much later that it was pay but no credit.


The bottom line is, the 2015 crew deserved to be recalled, because they had lost the trust of the pilot group.

I haven't heard any other reason why these ATL FO reps are up for recall, besides the fact that they voted for the "wrong guy" for MEC Chairman.
Reply
Old 01-27-2017 | 09:42 PM
  #140  
newKnow's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
Default

Originally Posted by Trip7
Not very good. Track record of the current Capt Reps....excellent



Why would we be going back to the old gang? Almost all are Captains. C44 currently has 2 solid, well respected Capt Reps that are not remotely old guard. Even gzsg endorsed them. I'll gladly take two more moderates like then as FO reps.



Thanks, same can be said right back at you. It was a pleasure although it was a quick trip.



Where are these "old guard" FOs coming from? Even they exist how will they win an election when you have two Moderate Captain reps with what appears to be very high approval rating in C44?
Trip,


What percentage of ATL pilots do you believe supported Malone for MEC Chairman?
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Raeamb1
Major
37
09-19-2016 08:28 PM
sinkrate3278
Flight Schools and Training
7
03-22-2011 07:40 PM
vagabond
Foreign
1
09-14-2010 10:08 AM
joel payne
Foreign
48
11-19-2009 04:28 PM
block30
Technical
34
10-24-2009 09:48 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices