Worst (er) (est) MEC Chair
03-03-2024, 05:10 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by dmeg13021
No one, including Anne (who is —and was— more than capable of speaking for herself) was against “furlough relief” and wanted to cruelly cast the poor Riddle grads to the wolves. It was the manner in which it pitted the “thirds” against each other rather than forcing the company to eat the cost of furloughs via displacements and training that was too much for some of us to stomach. And it did nothing to prevent furloughs after Jun 2020 if memory serves. But in hindsight, the result after government bailout was pretty advantageous. Plus you got a 5% raise when the company wanted to give it to you during negotiations.
What was the vote on the furlough relief? Was it 100-0, or possibly something else?
So again, was the "NO bracelet" about the furlough relief vote? The package presented to the membership?
I mean you only get to vote on the ammendment pushed to the proletariate. If the MEC was in favor and put it out for MEMRAT, was she supporting the majority or was the the "outlier" with a "just vote No" bracelet?
03-03-2024, 05:24 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 2,368
Originally Posted by dmeg13021
No one, including Anne (who is —and was— more than capable of speaking for herself) was against “furlough relief” and wanted to cruelly cast the poor Riddle grads to the wolves. It was the manner in which it pitted the “thirds” against each other rather than forcing the company to eat the cost of furloughs via displacements and training that was too much for some of us to stomach. And it did nothing to prevent furloughs after Jun 2020 if memory serves. But in hindsight, the result after government bailout was pretty advantageous. Plus you got a 5% raise when the company wanted to give it to you during negotiations.
The sunset was in 2021. The LOA didn’t pass until fall 2020. But to the point of the discussion, I have no idea if she was for or against it—I wasn’t in the same council and she wasn’t an LEC rep of C11 at the time. There were a large number of people against it, for a number of reasons, but she didn’t get any more of a vote than the rest of the membership.
Last edited by ThumbsUp; 03-03-2024 at 05:36 PM.
03-03-2024, 06:23 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2012
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by Race Bannon
"No one including Anne was against furlough relief" sounds pretty unaminous.
What was the vote on the furlough relief? Was it 100-0, or possibly something else?
So again, was the "NO bracelet" about the furlough relief vote? The package presented to the membership?
I mean you only get to vote on the ammendment pushed to the proletariate. If the MEC was in favor and put it out for MEMRAT, was she supporting the majority or was the the "outlier" with a "just vote No" bracelet?
What was the vote on the furlough relief? Was it 100-0, or possibly something else?
So again, was the "NO bracelet" about the furlough relief vote? The package presented to the membership?
I mean you only get to vote on the ammendment pushed to the proletariate. If the MEC was in favor and put it out for MEMRAT, was she supporting the majority or was the the "outlier" with a "just vote No" bracelet?
03-03-2024, 06:59 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by Knotcher
So your "troubling to the masses" assertion is bunk...definitely some homework for you to do on this subject.
"Bunk" implies lacking of merit or credibility on a factual basis. "Unpalatable for many" still puts you in the minority doesn't it?
If(big if, because nobody will answer forthrightly) she was against the furlough mitigation(because it had some flaws) but it passed, then she was on the wrong side of that issue. When(if) a person is against the majority opinion and subsequently wants to represent those people, then I think an explaination is warranted. If her supporters can't understand this, then they are just blind supporters and no better than Toddlers.
I can't even get a honest answer to what her "NO Braclet" was for. If it was against the furlough relief, then I would expect an explaination.
Why does this ruffle any feathers? Seems fairly common sensical, don't take it personally.
03-04-2024, 02:04 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,827
Originally Posted by Race Bannon
Please school me. Did the furoulgh relief pass or not. What did the majority vote for. Was she for it, or against it?
"Bunk" implies lacking of merit or credibility on a factual basis. "Unpalatable for many" still puts you in the minority doesn't it?
If(big if, because nobody will answer forthrightly) she was against the furlough mitigation(because it had some flaws) but it passed, then she was on the wrong side of that issue. When(if) a person is against the majority opinion and subsequently wants to represent those people, then I think an explaination is warranted. If her supporters can't understand this, then they are just blind supporters and no better than Toddlers.
I can't even get a honest answer to what her "NO Braclet" was for. If it was against the furlough relief, then I would expect an explaination.
Why does this ruffle any feathers? Seems fairly common sensical, don't take it personally.
"Bunk" implies lacking of merit or credibility on a factual basis. "Unpalatable for many" still puts you in the minority doesn't it?
If(big if, because nobody will answer forthrightly) she was against the furlough mitigation(because it had some flaws) but it passed, then she was on the wrong side of that issue. When(if) a person is against the majority opinion and subsequently wants to represent those people, then I think an explaination is warranted. If her supporters can't understand this, then they are just blind supporters and no better than Toddlers.
I can't even get a honest answer to what her "NO Braclet" was for. If it was against the furlough relief, then I would expect an explaination.
Why does this ruffle any feathers? Seems fairly common sensical, don't take it personally.
It passed 54-46. Her bracelet was against the POS contract TI tried to ramrod through because he “has Scott Kirby’s number in my cell phone.” She was against the LOA and explained why countless times, the biggest reason being we already had a mechanism in place to deal with furloughs…the biggest reason being having to furlough in reverse seniority would
have decimated the training center. TI voluntarily gave that away after getting schooled by Kirby.
03-04-2024, 04:07 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 702
Originally Posted by Race Bannon
Clarification please. Did she buy "NO" bracelets for the Furlough mitigation agreement or, for the TUMI TA?
Big difference between the two IMO
Big difference between the two IMO
TA1 was NO.
03-04-2024, 04:46 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: 787
Posts: 458
I hate this profession so much. Let’s start just rehashing old wounds thinking people are going to change their minds.
A few of my favorite captains to fly with happened also to be no voters, and I learned a ton from them and never felt any animosity toward them.
As someone who was saved by the LOA and is now most likely furlough proof - I would still vote for the LOA without any hesitation and I sincerely hope that if/when we find ourselves in another mess, the pilots get to decide if we save the junior list, not the MEC/MC.
A few of my favorite captains to fly with happened also to be no voters, and I learned a ton from them and never felt any animosity toward them.
As someone who was saved by the LOA and is now most likely furlough proof - I would still vote for the LOA without any hesitation and I sincerely hope that if/when we find ourselves in another mess, the pilots get to decide if we save the junior list, not the MEC/MC.
03-04-2024, 04:49 AM
#38
Pilot Response
Joined APC: May 2011
Position: A320 Captain
Posts: 479
Please think about finding a hobby, spending more time with family and friends, or even working more. This is embarrassing to read. I finished high school in 1983, it was great; you should try it.
Last edited by NFLUALNFL; 03-04-2024 at 05:07 AM.
03-04-2024, 04:18 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2022
Posts: 150
Just going to throw this out there for those enjoying rapid advancement and pay. Eventually, there will be an event that will necessitate manpower reduction and an attempt on contract sacrifices.
Our recent growth is impressive but I also view it as a gamble. Who pays for that gamble if it turns south? We should be slowly building a furlough fund for “those in need” if and when it happens. Furloughs should be as difficult and expensive as possible for the company so they furlough the minimal number.
The pandemic LOA shifted the burden of furloughs onto the pilot group and paying for the company’s gamble. Luckily the government guaranteed our salaries.
Our recent growth is impressive but I also view it as a gamble. Who pays for that gamble if it turns south? We should be slowly building a furlough fund for “those in need” if and when it happens. Furloughs should be as difficult and expensive as possible for the company so they furlough the minimal number.
The pandemic LOA shifted the burden of furloughs onto the pilot group and paying for the company’s gamble. Luckily the government guaranteed our salaries.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
