Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Frontier
We are all on the same team here >

We are all on the same team here

Search

Notices

We are all on the same team here

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-25-2026 | 06:42 AM
  #61  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 778
Likes: 40
Default

Originally Posted by emersonbiguns
Sounds like you're 165/169LEC-splaining.

Kinda like they burnt the house down, but it doesn't matter because we weren't planning on living there for a few years.
"Cutting your nose off to spite your face," is the expression that keeps coming up in my mind. I hope they are proud of the destruction they have caused.
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 07:25 AM
  #62  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Feb 2022
Posts: 4
Likes: 1
Default Same Team?

I don't believe 165 and 169 are on the same team as the entire pilot group.

At this point, people are starting to joke about the "no fly list", and you might want to take a guess who is ending up on it. That is not a great place for union reps to be.

It would help to hear clearly what each of your (165 and 169) positions is and what the actual plan is going forward. As it stands, this feels a lot like Ready-Fire-Aim, and everyone else is left dealing with the consequences.

Because of your actions, we are now looking at going 6 to 9 months without a negotiating committee. That means we are unable to properly negotiate any LOA's for AQP OR a new contract. That is a serious failure with real impact on everyone involved.

What is being done to fix this, and when can we expect it?

People are looking for alignment, transparency, and some sign of a coordinated path forward. Right now, that is not what they are seeing.
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 07:37 AM
  #63  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 542
Likes: 125
Default

Originally Posted by CHPFLY
I don't believe 165 and 169 are on the same team as the entire pilot group.

At this point, people are starting to joke about the "no fly list", and you might want to take a guess who is ending up on it. That is not a great place for union reps to be.

It would help to hear clearly what each of your (165 and 169) positions is and what the actual plan is going forward. As it stands, this feels a lot like Ready-Fire-Aim, and everyone else is left dealing with the consequences.

Because of your actions, we are now looking at going 6 to 9 months without a negotiating committee. That means we are unable to properly negotiate any LOA's for AQP OR a new contract. That is a serious failure with real impact on everyone involved.

What is being done to fix this, and when can we expect it?

People are looking for alignment, transparency, and some sign of a coordinated path forward. Right now, that is not what they are seeing.
All correct. Now the company is going to implement AQP on their own without any input from the union. And then we wait…how long? Who knows. A lot of us won’t see a new contract thanks to these two.
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 10:13 AM
  #64  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Feb 2022
Posts: 4
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by CGLimits
All correct. Now the company is going to implement AQP on their own without any input from the union. And then we wait…how long? Who knows. A lot of us won’t see a new contract thanks to these two.
These two? - Is it not a Capt and FO rep from 165 and 169 so 4 people?

Agreed - they set the entire pilot group back and gave a huge gift to the Company...
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 10:16 AM
  #65  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 542
Likes: 125
Default

Originally Posted by CHPFLY
These two? - Is it not a Capt and FO rep from 165 and 169 so 4 people?

Agreed - they set the entire pilot group back and gave a huge gift to the Company...
You are right. These 4…although I think 2 of those led the 4 man pack.
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 11:17 AM
  #66  
Almost there
 
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 1,988
Likes: 126
Default

Originally Posted by CGLimits
You are right. These 4…although I think 2 of those led the 4 man pack.
Really only 1 needs to be recalled and they would immediately become outnumbered. It would also send a clear message to the remaining three.
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 12:41 PM
  #67  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 155
Likes: 10
Default

Originally Posted by Stayontarget
Really only 1 needs to be recalled and they would immediately become outnumbered. It would also send a clear message to the remaining three.
Before this happened there were many people on the board opining that we needed a new NC and that a contract was no where near. Well, it looks like we’re trying something new now. It can’t be much worse. We were already in a holding pattern as we elected a new MEC chair. Let’s get some fresh blood and some fresh perspective and get what we deserve.

165 and 169 will always win a roll call vote unless we redistrict the LECs and evenly distribute the pilots. This is why MM had the other LEC reps stay away from that meeting a while ago. It’s obvious that the reps are not seeing eye to eye-that’s unfortunate. We as a pilot group need to decide which LECs we are more aligned with. Personally, I like the aggressive style of 165 and 169. Maybe the other reps should get recalled? We haven’t gotten anywhere with a contract by playing the game the way MM was directing it. Maybe it’s time for a change? Maybe it’s time to let the a-holes be in charge.

Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 01:40 PM
  #68  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 778
Likes: 40
Default

Originally Posted by Biffsteritis
Before this happened there were many people on the board opining that we needed a new NC and that a contract was no where near. Well, it looks like we’re trying something new now. It can’t be much worse. We were already in a holding pattern as we elected a new MEC chair. Let’s get some fresh blood and some fresh perspective and get what we deserve.

165 and 169 will always win a roll call vote unless we redistrict the LECs and evenly distribute the pilots. This is why MM had the other LEC reps stay away from that meeting a while ago. It’s obvious that the reps are not seeing eye to eye-that’s unfortunate. We as a pilot group need to decide which LECs we are more aligned with. Personally, I like the aggressive style of 165 and 169. Maybe the other reps should get recalled? We haven’t gotten anywhere with a contract by playing the game the way MM was directing it. Maybe it’s time for a change? Maybe it’s time to let the a-holes be in charge.
I'm stuck on the on level 3 of Super Mario Bro maybe if I randomly mash buttons I'll get past it. Same idea.
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 01:54 PM
  #69  
Almost there
 
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 1,988
Likes: 126
Default

Originally Posted by Biffsteritis
Before this happened there were many people on the board opining that we needed a new NC and that a contract was no where near. Well, it looks like we’re trying something new now. It can’t be much worse. We were already in a holding pattern as we elected a new MEC chair. Let’s get some fresh blood and some fresh perspective and get what we deserve.

165 and 169 will always win a roll call vote unless we redistrict the LECs and evenly distribute the pilots. This is why MM had the other LEC reps stay away from that meeting a while ago. It’s obvious that the reps are not seeing eye to eye-that’s unfortunate. We as a pilot group need to decide which LECs we are more aligned with. Personally, I like the aggressive style of 165 and 169. Maybe the other reps should get recalled? We haven’t gotten anywhere with a contract by playing the game the way MM was directing it. Maybe it’s time for a change? Maybe it’s time to let the a-holes be in charge.
Polling reflected the opposite of what you say. That alone is enough to refute what has happened much less the preponderance of evidence against them.

I’m pretty sure MM was directing it the way ALPA professionals, attorneys, and people with vast experience directed it.

Even if you thought the entire NC needed to be replaced this is not how you do it. These guys couldn’t negotiate with the people in their own corner and yet you think they can negotiate with the company?
Reply
Old 04-25-2026 | 02:52 PM
  #70  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 778
Likes: 40
Default

Originally Posted by Stayontarget
Polling reflected the opposite of what you say. That alone is enough to refute what has happened much less the preponderance of evidence against them.

I’m pretty sure MM was directing it the way ALPA professionals, attorneys, and people with vast experience directed it.

Even if you thought the entire NC needed to be replaced this is not how you do it. These guys couldn’t negotiate with the people in their own corner and yet you think they can negotiate with the company?
The polling data was fake because I talked to two different people who said they were polled and they disagred with the data./s
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Stonewall
FedEx
80
03-10-2026 03:47 PM
Cptdondo
Flight Schools and Training
6
04-07-2017 04:46 PM
hepcat13
Corporate
31
02-11-2016 08:04 PM
pilot0987
Your Photos and Videos
2
11-13-2012 06:38 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



Your Privacy Choices