Originally Posted by hitimefurl

Well, according to the DPA Constitution this would be even more public and take even longer as it would involve all the pilots. I can't say that either situation is good for anyone but at least our reps do seem to be interested that something isn't working in ATL.

I also don't know how you can say King is not from the school of Moak? He worked for Moak his entire Administration and only returned to the line for a few months under O'Malley. The guys who didn't want to work with Moak all quit or had their resignations accepted. Remember?

Doth the emperor really have new clothes? Every single one of his letters to us has been about getting along and being unified and working together. If working together isn't a Moakism then I don't know what is. None of his chairmans letters have said anything other than, well let's look at them together:



The volunteers who remained were presumably from the alleged constructive engagement group yet he starts of his letter by writing that he is going to continue with constructive engagement. The last letter he wrote detailed dealing with the DPA and makes no mention of a change in constructive engagement. If this is some sort of evolution in getting the work done why hasn't he written a new letter explaining this?

As to the "scourge" letter are you really going to tell me someone else writes and approves his letters and sends them out without his permission or somehow strong armed him into doing so when his last letter says "At our most recent MEC meeting, all 29 elected representatives agreed to address this threat to our professional future more pointedly."

As recently as 6 weeks ago the entire mec supported King and his direction and his dealing with DPA. What the heck happened?

Originally Posted by Fly4hire

Bigbus,

There is a HUGE difference between part time and full time volunteers at DALPA and fNWA, and how those position were selected and what they paid. Most of those you mention have never held a full time position and volunteered, ran and were elected, and spent countless hours of personal time, on layovers, doing it unpaid.

At DALPA the positions fired were lucrative full time positions essentially given out via a system of patronage. Except for Hanson, the other three had been on essentially full time flight pay loss for most the last 7 years.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

I believe you're right that Kingsley signed the letter. I said at the time it was a huge unforced error and showed great immaturity on the part of the author. It was a long letter that I now know he didnt write, and maybe he didn't proofread every word.



It makes me wonder as well, but my eyes are wide open on this. Since we don't have a new union yet, our choices are Kingsley versus Lee Moak puppets. My only choice is to back Kingsley and the firings of all the Moak disciples he instituted. I also hope that ATL reps Dave Hamilton and Armando Gomez (pure Moak disciples) are recalled at this meeting as well.



Agreed. But unfortunately, this is a critical part of the process to possibly get that real representation. Moak sees this as a fight for his political life. He needs his people back in office and these new people out. If he can do it, he continues to control DALPA, and by extension, his presidency. If he loses, he probably won't be reelected and he knows it. The reps who will probably vote to keep the 4 guys fired are all in danger right now IMO...especially Dave Nestor in ATL. All these guys need the protection of the line guys right now or the Moak disciples will return.

Carl

Originally Posted by Fly4hire

Except for Hanson, the other three had been on essentially full time flight pay loss for most the last 7 years.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Since you're bringing up DPA, I have a question. What if DPA was our bargaining agent right now and this was going on? How many ALPA loyalists here would be howling about how embarrassing, weak, amateur hour, not ready for prime time, etc., this is? How many would be stating the danger in this appearance of disunity in front of management? How many would be screaming for a return to ALPA before this hurts all Delta pilots any further?

Carl

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

You completely dodged my questions. But in your dissertation you reveal yourself to be a Moak loyalist pure and simple. I'm glad you did because I've wondered where you stood regarding the "Dear Leader."

Carl

Originally Posted by Herkflyr

The only thing I do know is that none of this gets me or anyone else improvements to our contract, and RA is chuckling.

Originally Posted by hitimefurl

You didn't ask me any questions you asked tsquare. You wanna throw stones or talk? I don't understand dear leader?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

At a large meeting a few years ago, I referred to Lee Moak as Kim Jong Moak. Nearly everyone there laughed loudly. It was a play on the name of the then North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il. The North Koreans simply referred to him as the "Dear Leader."

I called out Moak's dictatorial behavior over 3 years ago. You now see the word "dictatorship" used in describing our former MEC's behavior in the current local council's letters.

Anyhoo, that's what I mean by Dear Leader.

Carl