Special Magenta Line – ALPA 43rd Biennial BOD

Reply Subscribe

Page 5 of 6

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

10-22-2010, 04:59 AM

#41

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClipperJet

What was/is the point of this election?

If you want a strong, national union then you pick the best person, period. From whatever airline.

If your idea is that your MEC only vote for the people from your own company, no matter what the qualifications of the other candidates, the you will NEVER have a strong, national union.

Fair enough, but this goes beyond Pierce and the election. The other thing is that when you're in what are essentially three way negotiations, you need to present as unified a front as possible.

10-22-2010, 05:40 AM

#42

EWRflyr

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2008

Position: 737 CAPT

Posts: 1,887

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClipperJet

That was my point when I said I was glad to see our MEC endorse UNANIMOUSLY Capt. Stratton from FDX. As much as I would hope that the CAL candidate was the best person for the job in a perfect world, if there was someone out there who would do the job better, I expected my reps to support that candidate. It appears this was the case and my MEC was not a rubber stamp for Prater just because he is CAL and they are CAL.

10-22-2010, 05:48 AM

#43

EWRflyr

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2008

Position: 737 CAPT

Posts: 1,887

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

I agree Pierce should go in March because he broke his commitment, but Pierce never hid his intentions for national, he just said he wouldn't go until either: A) His term was up, or B) The JCBA (it might have been the SLI) was completed. He said he wouldn't go to the company, ever. Ironically, because he's been thwarted at national, I, like you, wouldn't be shocked to see him appear as UAL management.

I don't view it as breaking his commitment. Listening to the town hall call the other day he laid it out as to what the thought process was. He said to the MEC he would abide by their wishes on the matter. If they wanted to release him from his commitment he would run. If they didn't he would continue his term as MEC chairman. They chose to allow him to run for First VP. I think he took the respectable road in this situation. He could easily have surprised everyone and announced his candidacy if he wanted to without any input or say from the MEC before hand.

I do think there needs to be a change on the MEC, but right now I think the pilots of the IAH council will have to be the ones to make that change for the good of all CAL pilots.

10-22-2010, 05:48 AM

#44

Skybo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2008

Posts: 169

Quote:

Originally Posted by EWR73FO

Problem is we are never going to get the truth. Both IAH CA & FO reps will never tell, Jay will never tell and if the "facts" were to actually come out, they will be done in closed session. The problem I see is perception. Perception about moral, ethics, and who these people actually represent. At the least, IMO, both the IAH CA & FO reps should step down.

The truth is only as good as the reputation of those telling it. I wouldn't trust Pierce, Baron, or Gator to watch my kids let alone tell the truth. The reps in IAH will come out with a statement. It's not up to the EWR pilots anyway. The IAH pilots have to decide if they are telling the truth. These reps actions are far more honorable than that of others in the union. I disagree...they should not step down. Just the fact they are voting against Pierce tells me they are there for this pilot group.

10-22-2010, 05:56 AM

#45

Skybo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2008

Posts: 169

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

Skybo, this goes beyond Baron, Pierce, and the communiqués from the union. I'd been hearing about 171 buddying up with UAL for a from others while. You are correct, we don't know what was said, but I've yet to hear someone in a position to know who backs 171's position.

I agree Pierce should go in March because he broke his commitment, but Pierce never hid his intentions for national, he just said he wouldn't go until either: A) His term was up, or B) The JCBA (it might have been the SLI) was completed. He said he wouldn't go to the company, ever. Ironically, because he's been thwarted at national, I, like you, wouldn't be shocked to see him appear as UAL management.

Yes, this does go beyond these so called trade unionists. They are far from it. How do you know if they are talking to the UAL folks, and how do you know it would be bad? Guess we will have to wait for an explanation. Pierce should leave now. Intentions for national? I was in the room when he said he would not seek any office. His intentions was to run for MEC chair of the combined groups. If that didn't work out he would return to flying....have you ever seen Jay Pierce fly a trip? Never! Trust me...the only place for him now is management. Awaiting another bullet point contract to ponder for ten days and then vote...God Help Us!

10-22-2010, 06:00 AM

#46

Skybo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2008

Posts: 169

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

Skybo, this forum isn't a deliberative body. Yes, I think the 171 reps are owed due process. However, the reality is they aren't putting their story out and I've been hearing about this since before it went public. My gut, along with the evidence so far, tells me the 171 reps have "gone rogue" at an inopportune time and the FO rep has violated the intent, if not the letter of the trip loss policy. Do we really need to go down that road again?

Wait and see before the hanging...

10-22-2010, 06:17 AM

#47

EWR73FO

Banned

Joined APC: Oct 2010

Position: IAH 737 CA

Posts: 690

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybo

I suppose you thought Kaye never told the truth either. How can what they did been even remotely considered honorable? This stinks of the same BS that came at the end of C02 and no matter how you spin it or distort it, they're in the wrong here.

10-22-2010, 08:15 AM

#48

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybo

How do you know if they are talking to the UAL folks, and how do you know it would be bad?

I only know what I was told by others on this, and you're right about them not knowing exactly what transpired, though I believe some of the information actually came from UAL-ALPA pilots coming to CAL-ALPA in a *** is up with your 171 reps. As far as whether it's a bad thing, no disrespect to UAL's pilots, but until the SLI is complete and we're one MEC, our goals don't align 100% and we need to have one message as CAL-ALPA.

Quote:

Guess we will have to wait for an explanation. Pierce should leave now...

I get it... you don't like Pierce and the ball is in 171's court (both the pilots and reps) right now as to where this goes from here. I've just got to ask why you're so willing to trash everyone else in the union, yet steadfastly defend the 171 reps.

10-22-2010, 08:28 AM

#49

CAL EWR

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2006

Posts: 258

Deleted not worth it. Say whatever you want John Ringel.

10-22-2010, 08:28 AM

#50

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybo

The truth is only as good as the reputation of those telling it. I wouldn't trust Pierce, Baron, or Gator to watch my kids let alone tell the truth.

The list of complainants goes well beyond them.

Quote:

The reps in IAH will come out with a statement. It's not up to the EWR pilots anyway. The IAH pilots have to decide if they are telling the truth.

True.

Quote:

These reps actions are far more honorable than that of others in the union.

Huh?

Quote:

I disagree...they should not step down. Just the fact they are voting against Pierce tells me they are there for this pilot group.

That's the criteria for proof you're for the pilots? All you've got to do is vote no? I'm all for letting them state their case... but they've yet to do so as far as I know.