Pipercub- I may have mentioned this earlier, but just in case I didn't: The Frontier side of RAH is pretty ticked and there is a lot of infighting.

You know what? You're 100% correct. I feel bad for the guys there who got sucked into the conflict and are really good guys. They're afraid if they speak up, or join the Airline Division, these guys will make their lives miserable.

Pretty sad.

ATC

answer the questions

I've asked an important question 3 times and you continue to conveniently ignore it in your pontifications.

I don't want to hear words like "underhanded", "illegal", etc., just the facts.

How does LOA67/Commercial Agreement "harm" (as in hurt you right now) IBT's ability to properly represent their membership?

I kind of doubt it. I've flown with a handful of guys who would have preferred the SWA deal, and they've been fine with expressing their views, even though they are very much the minority. The SWA deal at least had the upside of pay, job security, and more domiciles. The IBT offers us nothing except being forced to do it their way.

You should know by now that these guys are very short on facts and very long on hyperbolae.

ATCsaiddowhat, answer THE QUESTIONS!

Or how about if we throw out some plain vanilla mush like they've done:

"IBT hates the Frontier pilots and is actively seeking to have them fired so that real IBT pilots can fly every Airbus we have. They have bribed the Frontier CEO to lead the F9 pilots down the primrose path to separation, while really having a backroom deal with BB to trick us into not paying dues so they can sue FAPA and RAH. IBT has infiltrated FAPA leadership and the only person at the end of the day who will still have a job in the Airbus is Scott Gould - that's why he's now in management (and to fire us all)."

I don't know - it's just not as good as ATC's stuff. He makes it sound like he really believes it - I'm lacking that "je ne sais quoi"...or...umm...I don't know what.

Mulva...if you're going to be specific, it's a "shiny LITTLE Airbus." Because at best, you're a very light twin. And with an ego like yours, maybe you should be restricted to hang gliders and ultralights.

TillerEnvy has you pegged.

I would like to make three clarifications.

FAPA is not a Union, it is a legally registered "Labor Organization." The Frontier pilots are legally "represented" by IBT Local 357, whether the pilot is a Member of Local 357, an Agency Fee Payer or a Financial Core Fee Objector.

If you drew a Venn diagram of FAPA and FAPAInvest, legally there is 0%, as in NO, overlap. You are correct that there is a person that holds a title in both organizations. However, those responsibilities are completely separate as are the two entities.

That statement is quite simply, not true.

I bring it up only as a matter of credibility.

There were 4 Unions, and their Representatives (somewhere around 3 to 5 Reps for each Union), at the January 2010 meeting in Dallas to "Negotiate" the SLI. The IBT Reps walked out of that joint meeting after approximately 1 hour and refused to meet as a group ever again.

There were 4 unions at the "Mediation" in Sarasota. Roughly, the same number of Reps per Union as in Dallas.

Mediation was scheduled from Monday to Friday (February 15 to 19, 2010, inclusive).

RAH 747 / Trusteeship (whatever) Representatives showed up on Tuesday and left Thursday. They couldn't be there Monday as Sunday was Valentine’s Day and one of the ExCO Officers (not a Negotiating or Merger Committee Member) had an anniversary that weekend.

My point is – EVERY person present as Union Representatives for both the January and February meetings will tell you the same story, except for RAH IBT.

That's roughly 12 to 14 Reps word against the RAH IBT's 4 to 6 Reps.

How likely is it that 3 disparate pilot groups and Unions - ALPA (Midwest), UTU (Lynx) and FAPA (Frontier) would all agree on exactly the same sequence of events that IBT and now Local 357 claim occurred differently?

When I saw this timeline today, I thought it was eerily similar to ALPA, UTU and FAPA’s experience with the IBT in the SLI year.

http://www.myrjetworkplace.com/wp-co...n-Timeline.pdf

Not true. How do I know that is not true? It was I who delivered the speech, that's how.

I delivered a speech stating the pilot group was frustrated and angry, which was true. I suggested that management and labor working cooperatively would benefit all parties and that a continuation of the adversarial relationship, both in contract negotiations and in everyday operations would benefit neither party.

RH and AO called me a clown and a jackass (after I left) for suggesting that.

If this is the way they are going to spin the facts, I would take anything on that website with a large

http://oceansjsu.com/images/salt_pile.jpg grain of salt.