Bid Rumors?
12-04-2017, 02:23 PM
#221
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,820
Originally Posted by Daniel Larusso
You don’t like or agree with the MEC’s decision to make an agreement here. Fine, but they did make an agreement so there is no violation of the contract here no matter how many times and different ways you write that there was one. The rest is speculation. It’s a sleight of hand to say that the membership would benefit from a system bid now, especially when you then turn around and add more speculation from a block rep about what the company and ALPA would have done absent an agreement. All this back and forth and for what exactly? If I was a smarter man, I would ask with all these words why haven’t you asked me for my opinion of the decision to make this agreement? Alas, I am not and have thusly reached the finish line on this one.
To me the point is that the membership voted on and approved a contract, and now the MEC has decided that it is OK for the company not to uphold their end of the bargain.
12-05-2017, 12:13 PM
#222
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Originally Posted by pinseeker
To me the point is that the membership voted on and approved a contract, and now the MEC has decided that it is OK for the company not to uphold their end of the bargain.
That’s fine, I have no problem with that opinion and never have. I wasn’t asking what was the point of agreeing or disagreeing with the MEC’s decision. I was noting that it was curious that in all of this dialogue, I was never asked my opinion on the point you’re making. I wasn’t asked because it wasn’t important, I’m not the intended audience. The audience is the nearly 76,000 people who have read this thread so far looking for Bid Rumors and the people they may talk to. Take the issue at hand, repeat it a bunch of times with some speculation and sideshows and what do we have? Emotion. Just like everything we see and read on the news these days.
To what end though and why would that emotion be more important than simply asking the person you’re supposedly debating what their opinion is? Even the last two questions in response to the post you quoted are well played. They still don’t ask the obvious question, they are rather innocently posed setups. Anything I answer will be used to elicit more emotion around the MEC’s decision to execute an agreement. We love to talk around here about our group naïveté at times. It extends to more than just negotiations with the company.
Your comments are clear straight to the point. What is likely to follow will be more than that. I wasn’t clear enough in my previous post as to why I’m done with this, hope this is a little clearer.
12-05-2017, 02:45 PM
#223
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,820
Originally Posted by Daniel Larusso
That’s fine, I have no problem with that opinion and never have. I wasn’t asking what was the point of agreeing or disagreeing with the MEC’s decision. I was noting that it was curious that in all of this dialogue, I was never asked my opinion on the point you’re making. I wasn’t asked because it wasn’t important, I’m not the intended audience. The audience is the nearly 76,000 people who have read this thread so far looking for Bid Rumors and the people they may talk to. Take the issue at hand, repeat it a bunch of times with some speculation and sideshows and what do we have? Emotion. Just like everything we see and read on the news these days.
To what end though and why would that emotion be more important than simply asking the person you’re supposedly debating what their opinion is? Even the last two questions in response to the post you quoted are well played. They still don’t ask the obvious question, they are rather innocently posed setups. Anything I answer will be used to elicit more emotion around the MEC’s decision to execute an agreement. We love to talk around here about our group naïveté at times. It extends to more than just negotiations with the company.
Your comments are clear straight to the point. What is likely to follow will be more than that. I wasn’t clear enough in my previous post as to why I’m done with this, hope this is a little clearer.
To what end though and why would that emotion be more important than simply asking the person you’re supposedly debating what their opinion is? Even the last two questions in response to the post you quoted are well played. They still don’t ask the obvious question, they are rather innocently posed setups. Anything I answer will be used to elicit more emotion around the MEC’s decision to execute an agreement. We love to talk around here about our group naïveté at times. It extends to more than just negotiations with the company.
Your comments are clear straight to the point. What is likely to follow will be more than that. I wasn’t clear enough in my previous post as to why I’m done with this, hope this is a little clearer.
12-05-2017, 08:38 PM
#224
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Originally Posted by pinseeker
For someone who was done with this thread, you sure spent a lot of time responding to a one sentence comment. You are obviously ok with the union agreeing to allow the company to not follow the contract. That's your opinion. I would ask you if there is a section of the contract that you wouldn't want the union to agree to allow the company to violate, but you said you were done.
Good stuff.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-05-2017, 09:08 PM
#225
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Since when are we required to solicit your opinion on an internet forum? The whole point is to express your opinion if you have one. If you have an opinion, spit it out, stop moping around like your feelings are hurt.
I asked you 2 questions, you apparently don't want to answer. What's your agenda?
.
I asked you 2 questions, you apparently don't want to answer. What's your agenda?
.
12-06-2017, 06:13 AM
#227
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 2,418
It's not thread drift when it pertains to the subject.
Yes-I believe the company Intends to comply with CBA2015 on the next system bid. Whether they Will, that's a whole different question.
Unfortunately, We are very limited in what we can do when the company violates the CBA. Process isn't timely, at all. There are many times I wish there was a Govt agency we could appeal to, submit the evidence perspective, and get an answer. Quickly. But there's not.
Look at how long the 76 Passover pay took.
Consider how long the grievance over entering 4A2B took.
In many ways, RLA is Not our friend.
No idea how things stand now, but many years ago I was involved in a bar discussion over how Few Grievances we file compared to other airlines. One of the people involved felt it was because of the Our Lawyers Suck mindset so what's the use. Another felt it was because of DT (and then gave an example....which wasn't really appropriate IMO because I would've told him the same thing....had to do with his trip not ending when Indy shut down due to weather and his XXX-IND pairing was rerouted for an "Indy" sort in Memphis)
IMO-for the most part, Company Does comply with the CBA. CRS Will try and slip one by you, but it's been my experience that when I call them on it tend to get an Oh yeah, you're right. Forgot about that. Versus being upfront with the CBA says you don't have to accept the trip extension greater than....CBA says you need X hours before swapping Reserve periods...but you can waive that.
Yes-I believe the company Intends to comply with CBA2015 on the next system bid. Whether they Will, that's a whole different question.
Unfortunately, We are very limited in what we can do when the company violates the CBA. Process isn't timely, at all. There are many times I wish there was a Govt agency we could appeal to, submit the evidence perspective, and get an answer. Quickly. But there's not.
Look at how long the 76 Passover pay took.
Consider how long the grievance over entering 4A2B took.
In many ways, RLA is Not our friend.
No idea how things stand now, but many years ago I was involved in a bar discussion over how Few Grievances we file compared to other airlines. One of the people involved felt it was because of the Our Lawyers Suck mindset so what's the use. Another felt it was because of DT (and then gave an example....which wasn't really appropriate IMO because I would've told him the same thing....had to do with his trip not ending when Indy shut down due to weather and his XXX-IND pairing was rerouted for an "Indy" sort in Memphis)
IMO-for the most part, Company Does comply with the CBA. CRS Will try and slip one by you, but it's been my experience that when I call them on it tend to get an Oh yeah, you're right. Forgot about that. Versus being upfront with the CBA says you don't have to accept the trip extension greater than....CBA says you need X hours before swapping Reserve periods...but you can waive that.
12-06-2017, 09:43 AM
#228
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Originally Posted by kronan
Unfortunately, We are very limited in what we can do when the company violates the CBA. Process isn't timely, at all. There are many times I wish there was a Govt agency we could appeal to, submit the evidence perspective, and get an answer. Quickly. But there's not.
Management would never accept a, "We really tried to comply with that new section in the contract but it's complicated" from us?
MM
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
