If the recall fails, with both Cpt reps voting in favor of, time for a look at both of them? The 65 votes/proxies from the last meeting, which was low due to the two of them not wanting to fight the recall, could be increased significantly with the network in place that almost recalled the four horsemen.

 

Step 1. Handful of guys threaten to recall the FOs if they don't vote in lockstep with CAs
Step 2. FOs don't succumb to threats and vote their conscience
Step 3. Motion for their recall is placed on the agenda and the agenda is closed (precluding recall motion of CAs to surface) within minutes of their votes
Step 4. FOs offer to avoid the proxy circus and ask supporters to not oppose the recall effort at the meeting
Step 5. C44 Chair mocks them for trying to save the council from an ugly paper proxy war
Step 6. The ALPA machine kicks in gear and shows up with more proxies
Step 7. Social media declares that support for recall is running 2-1 based on the proxy count
Step 8. C44 CA reps send out scathing letter blaming the FOs exclusively for C44 dysfunction and formally support recall
Step 9. Up to the pilots of C44

The excuses for recall seem to be ever-shifting. First it's performance. Then it's because they voted for BB for MEC Chair (that's always been the real reason). Then it's performance again.

It seems the C44 CA reps have put themselves into a position of having to resign if the recall fails. They honor the majority wishes, right?

 

That's a great synopsis. If they were put up for recall, bet you *^* that the Captain reps would never forgo the proxy circus, and let the people speak to the matter!

 

DPA has never been viable. Just a few guys with a dead corpse between them pretending. But, this current 44 drama makes me wish we actually had adult leadership in place or in place of.

 

I didn't like the letter from SD, my guess is people who already were going to vote for recall will use it as justification for their vote and those who plan to vote to retain will be PO'd by the tone of the letter. It will be interesting to see if it has any effect on the apathetic majority, and what that effect might be.

 

2015 had a motivated engaged pilot group for very good reason. Now is a different time. The level of participation will be far less I fear. Call that a double standard if you like.

If the make up of the MEC changes and the chairman is recalled either with 17 members or 19 and 2 from C44 not democratically elected by the full council, then you will have your answer.

 

That reads like you're blaming the pilot group.

Reps were recalled in 2015 based upon their endorsement of TA1. Were those recalls justified?

I agree. We have a contract. I think that inhibits participation somewhat. So what? The question is one of justification. Period. The number who think a TA vote different than their's is sufficient or not is just math. I want to know if you think it's a valid reason.

It looks like you're dodging the question. The double standard is justifying recalls for one set of reps because you didn't agree with the way they voted on a TA, then taking the opposite view on recalls even though the results were more pronounced. THAT'S a double standard.

Having a contrary view on an issue - or issues - is not that big of a deal to me. Having integrity and commitment to being a good rep is my criteria.

So your premise is that once a rep is elected they are not longer accountable to the members? Recall is the only accountability tool we have. Regardless of how the MEC is comprised, and what risk that represents to the chairman, it's the way the process is laid out...just like a rep being able to cast the deciding vote for his own election as chairman.

The issue is whether or not the way our reps vote on a TA is justification for recall. It doesn't matter if "times have changed". Is it appropriate or not?

 

I don't remember reps ever being recalled for the way they voted for MEC Chair. Charting new ground here.

The 2015 reps in jeopardy were hard selling TA1 and knee deep in spending $1.7Min dues doing it.

This recall will send a chill through the ranks of pilots considering running for office. Even if it fails.

 

Is recall a part of our system? Yes. Is recall justified for a TA rejection? Yes, but so is any other vote (MEC chair etc.) or the opinions of any 2 members (mover and second) The bar is very low to start the process. C44 will decide, not me.

The point is the unique opportunity this situation presents to a once ousted insider to regain power and influence the MEC makeup. I don't deny these are all permitted under our rules of governance but they are unprecedented. The procedural opportunity that presents itself with the recall of one or both FO reps is real and it was most likely identified by a motivated individual who has a history of political maneuvering that places his cronies in power to control the MEC.

 

The real double standard is this - the same folks who howled about reserving recall for only the most egregious acts now think it's perfectly acceptable to recall these two.

I'm confused about what they're being recalled for (well, actually I'm not). First it was promoted as performance (the Flower Fund of all things) even though the recall started within minutes of the MEC elections, then it was for voting against JM (actually it's for BB) and voting against 82% of the pilots (purposely twisting vote logic and conclusions to distort). Now, it's performance again (we don't get along so it's their fault).

So, the average line pilot, many of whom have no clue to ALPA's insider club and the damage they've caused, now are beginning to wonder if there's smoke there must be fire.

In round 1 of recalls, there were clear derelictions of duty coupled with a demeaning and condescending attitude towards the constituents.

I've not heard one instance of these two mocking anyone's Yes or No vote or saying "the smart vote is Yes (or No), which means you're stupid if you're not voting the same as the rep.

The irony in all this is that the first round of reps almost cost us $1B (?) and the second round of reps (including the two FOs up for recall) salvaged it.

If not getting along in C44 puts an extra $1B in our pockets, I'm all for them not getting along going forward.

MECs that got along have cost me millions and I'm not exaggerating.