Originally Posted by kronan (Post 3757646)

And the very next day our Union confirmed they were the result of an additional customer pickup.

And the very next month they were in the bidpack.

From the assertions, pretty odd not to see a pretty hefty cancellation fee hit the books\streets.
Or maybe our Wet Lease contracts are just like our hotel contracts, we reserve the right to cancel them with 24 hours advance notice at no cost to us

Originally Posted by kronan (Post 3757646)

And the very next day our Union confirmed they were the result of an additional customer pickup.

And the very next month they were in the bidpack.

From the assertions, pretty odd not to see a pretty hefty cancellation fee hit the books\streets.
Or maybe our Wet Lease contracts are just like our hotel contracts, we reserve the right to cancel them with 24 hours advance notice at no cost to us

Originally Posted by CactusMan (Post 3755480)

I think the window for 50.1% might be almost completely shut. Recalls voted for this week would have to run for 30 days and if the votes were rushed, that would leave a little over a week the end of Feb for the MEC to vote and send TA1.1 to the pilot group…before the LEC 26 permanent reps take their seats 1 Mar.

Attempt 1 to temporarily fill LEC 26 with old guard failed as 2/3 elected reps took the interim seats. I argue this week was attempt 2 to get those seats filled with old guard, and any others would be a bonus.

IF (and that’s a big if, I get it) the senior/older retirement crowd is pushing for a TA1.1 that still improves retirement at the expense of QOL, pay and scope (what TA1 did - pitting senior vs junior), they have two deadlines approaching that make it difficult to forward another concessionary contract. The first deadline is 1 Mar, when LEC 26 elected reps take their permanent seats. The second deadline is when PM is replaced. Cancellation of Tuesday’s meeting effectively closed the door for the MEC to send TA1.1 to the pilot group before 1 Mar.

Tell me where I screwed up that math 🤷🏼‍♂️

Originally Posted by Herkguy80 (Post 3757679)

What is the current political split in the union, old guard vs new?

Am I right in assuming TA 1.1 would fail currently at the MEC level or no?

Originally Posted by max8222 (Post 3757640)

If you can't provide reliable facts then it is just rumours. I would ask my block rep TC but he doesn't answer emails. To busy trying to recall reps that do not align with his pack.

Originally Posted by max8222 (Post 3757640)

If you can't provide reliable facts then it is just rumours. I would ask my block rep TC but he doesn't answer emails. To busy trying to recall reps that do not align with his pack.

Originally Posted by Herkguy80 (Post 3757679)

What is the current political split in the union, old guard vs new?

Am I right in assuming TA 1.1 would fail currently at the MEC level or no?

Originally Posted by CactusMan (Post 3757941)

It looks like currently 8-6 in favor of not pursuing a TA1.1 that barely scrapes by, becoming 9-5 on 1 Mar. Those who were calling for Block 7’s recall talked about making it 10-4.

I perceive that the old guard essentially said “fine, if you want to recall block 7 we’ll play that game too and recall everyone…what do we have to lose.” A senior mentor here reached out to me to make sure I vote, but of course asked me where I stood before he made that push. He also reached out to me a few days before ratification closed pushing me to vote yes.

It’s very frustrating to see that not only was our union content to send us such a divisive, senior-vs-junior, TA for ratification. More frustrating is that so many of them still seem to want to do it, with the endless recalls, MBCBP education, fellating of PM, etc.