When folks have very little in common (nothing new/millions out there) they normally meet to work out these differences. Anthrax put it out there, it’s not that hard. I guess the best advice of: “Seek to understand and then to be understood” is quite dead or circumvented in some form or fashion. “Very little in common” is a poor excuse. It would be interesting and possibly very advantageous to see the outcome of any such “cup of Joe” discussion. Obviously I am not part of this outfit but this would benefit any outfit within its own ranks as we have done on the flight deck and many times outside of the workspace. At least conjure up some great rumors!

Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Dr. Stephen R. Covey, first published in 1989, is still one of the best books I have read. “Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood” is one of those habits.

I understand now why you don't understand.

First things first. It is well understood by both sides that I take the time to understand the issues. Not just on the surface, but on several levels. I have seen time and time again where reps have come to the table without reading their homework, and they get a vote, which is very frustrating, especially when the membership doe not seem to care or hold them accountable for their lack of effort.

Second, apathy allows pilots, with no real skill set, to run unopposed. The company hires experts with proven track records.

The company spends a lot of money working through several options and then implements the one they believe will make the most money. There have been resolutions where the reps have had minutes to consider the issue before voting on it. I tried to force a minimum 24 or 72 hour waiting period prior to any vote on every issue so we could read, understand, and discuss the issue, but those efforts failed because of the very same reps. In each case, those resolutions costed the pilots time, effort, and money. Later after reflection, several reps would have changed their votes "if only they knew."

As for the union, we are the stockholders. And when we are unhappy with BOD, we have the right to say so. It is just how it works.

Have I been right every time, heck no. That is not what I am saying, What I am saying is your reps don't have MBA's (neither do I), well except for one of them I hear. And your reps don't have the experience of running a union or a multi-billion dollar airline. They are not experts in the aspects they deal with, and the volunteers may or may not be as well. All of these issues require time to explore and get right every time. Yet look at the results.

Pick any group of pilots from our MSL and have them play the Yankees. You know the outcome before the game is played. Same thing here with one exception. With unity we can achieve our reasonable goals. The problem is lack of leadership and the lack of listening. Our reps are not the smartest people in the room every time. And they are not understood by the membership. They don't listen like they should. That is part of the problems I am trying to solve.

Dealing with these issues is very hard. If we don't demand our reps take the time to really understand the issues, we are not going to get the contract we want. Yes that takes a lot more work, but that is what they signed up to do.

We are rapidly approaching May. Do you understand where your reps stand? Do they understand where you stand?



Are you willing to give 1% of your time to get the contract you deserve? If so, show up for one union meeting a year, call, write, or talk to your reps every other month about the issues, update your ALPA records so you can receive the information. And vote after being educated on the issues.



Or get the other contract you deserve because you did not get involved. I assure you the company understands and costs out every change. They are counting on you to not get involved and for you not to understand before you vote just like last time. And the time before that.

That is what I am trying to avoid this time. And it starts with leadership, listening, and membership involvement.



And the leaders who don't want you involved, or don't want to listen are not on your side.

You're a shill - either that or your management. When guys start crying about "calling for an illegal work action" they are either flying the crap out of draft or are management. Please take it elsewhere - you're only killing the efforts of unity here.

Agree! Beyond the Book - That was a very good course when offered in/to the military including the “4 lenses” if you will. But that was a long time ago and in a galaxy far, far away…

If you encourage a pilot to do or not do something that effects the company's ability to fill trips because we are in negotiations, that is an illegal job action. Telling pilots not to fly draft because we are in negotiations can constitute an illegal job action. Don't be foolish.

I’m neither shill nor management. I’m telling you straight up that what you’re doing here is illegal, and you certainly shouldn’t be influencing others to do the same. This is the last I’ll say about this but for those of you listening on the sidelines don’t listen to these clowns. They are either ignorant or trying to get you to do something that will get you into trouble.

That is definitely the company's position, we all know that. But lately, I've been thinking about the 1st Amendment. I'm no expert and have done no real research, but isn't there a difference between a Union (or someone in a Union leadership position) advocating for something that would be considered an illegal job action, and an individual in a public forum exercising their right to free speech by voicing their personal opinion? Maybe someone smarter and more experienced than me can chime in.

1st amnd applies ONLY to the government (fed, state, local). Does not apply to the rest of the world.

You have almost zero "rights" associated with free speech with regards to private persons, corporations, or organizations.

You can say whatever you want, and they can impose consequences.

Also 1st amnd does not apply to conspiracy... you are not free to conspire, without consequence, to commit crimes or torts.

Precedent and case law is well established on this. Any member of the labor group who advocates for wildcat action can cause the entire group to be held accountable. It's even happened with what should have been anonymous internet posts.

The reason for that is obvious... otherwise the MEC would say "don't do it" in public, while coordinating in private with an unofficial action team to make it happen... RLA would have no control over us. Like Sinn Fein and the IRA.

They already have!