New timeline?

Reply Subscribe

Page 2 of 2

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

01-24-2011 | 05:20 AM

#11

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klsytakesit

...In Dec of 08 the Alaska mec and nc sent out a 30 plus page document to explain why the companies "last, best offer" was completely off the mark and why they could easily afford the associations "last, best offer".....in april of 09, 78% of the pilots voted yes on a TA that was well below the companies last best offer of Dec 08...

Why did the MEC approve a TA they themselves had said was inadequate just four months prior?

01-24-2011 | 06:34 AM

#12

EWRflyr

Line Holder

Joined: Jun 2008

Posts: 1,980

Likes: 15

From: 737 CAPT

Quote:

Originally Posted by XHooker

Why did the MEC approve a TA they themselves had said was inadequate just four months prior?

Aren't facts and questions like that so inconvenient to mention when trying to make an argument?

Have to watch that here. Remember any new JCBA TA must first pass two INDEPENDENT MECs before being sent to our combined pilot group. I strongly believe our combined group is unified on what we want to see, esp. in regards to career protections, etc. However, I also believe that if a JCBA TA gets by the two independent MECs with something unacceptable to the line pilots, it will have a greater chance of being ratified.

01-25-2011 | 11:21 AM

#13

Boneman

I love my job!

Joined: Jan 2006

Posts: 276

Likes: 0

From: B757 Capt

Quote:

Originally Posted by EWRflyr

That is not quite correct. The company can ask for the membership to vote on a proposed contract even if it is not endorsed by the MEC(s). I hope you are correct on the second point; however, the current CAL MEC's response to the 70 seat fiasco leaves me wondering. Point three is well taken as we have seen in an earlier thread, some pilots will just do as their MEC recommends regardless of how bad the contract may be.