|
Originally Posted by APC225
(Post 970486)
That's a hopeful view and I hope you're right.
However, I would much rather the MEC chair tell anyone who asks--the NC, the company, another MEC member, a pilot, the survey writer--"it isn't up for discussion." |
Originally Posted by Ottopilot
(Post 970487)
I only need one question on scope.
My scope: ALL CAL/UAL flying to be done by CAL/UAL pilots only! No need for more questions. No need for long explainations. Simply put, that's PhD level.....Good Man. |
Originally Posted by T Dawg
(Post 970489)
I would too. No Scope = a 100% No Vote
Feel your pain from the sidelines....no fun. SCOPE or nothing.....from just about all guys/gals I've flow with on the CAL side. Hopefully we can bring this home on both sides for the good of the future pilot group. |
Originally Posted by T Dawg
(Post 970483)
APC – You might be correct. I’ll only offer one of several possibilities to consider. There could be many reasons they could be asking this question. Not all bad.
Not sure as to the make up on the negotiating committee, but one reason this question could be asked is to merely squash the argument of one of the committee members. I have no inside scoop, but I could see polling the group to get the leverage to quiet down a committee member that’s way off the mark. I’d hate to think that we haven’t learned from our past mistakes (Trade Scope for $$). But the bottom line is you have the final say whether a TA is ratified. I’m definitely not accusing or have any knowledge. I only want to point out that there are a lot of reasons to poll…. Some not as obvious as the others. We KNOW the company wants to eliminate scope (their ultimate desire) or at the very least extend the UAL scope to the CAL operations. So it is being discussed at the table. The company could be saying that our union really doesn't know what we want regarding scope vs. all other parts of the contract if they improve (i.e. make a trade). The union could be saying we know what our pilots want, but let's find out. Let's put all the various options on the table that management wants to discuss with us regarding scope. We'll put in the options, not hide them, and let the pilots show us their desires. That could be the reason for the question the way it is. You have all the options that management will want to discuss. You have the option the union wishes as the outcome. Now you tell the union which one is best for you (and the combined pilot group) and let them take the results to the company to say, "I think we have a concrete idea of what our pilots want." Just another way to look at that question. |
Originally Posted by EWRflyr
(Post 970814)
OR how about another perspective?
.... Just another way to look at that question. I just think at the core it is an issue that should not be on the table in any way, at any time. There is not even a neutral position here. Like it or not, we're one big pilot group of 12,000 pilots now and not only can we not give away more, but UAL's relaxation of scope must be completely undone. It is OUR problem now. The only acceptable outcome at the end of this is the trifecta of reversal of scope, new FAA rest rules, and retirements kicking in, resulting in not only in all recalls, but a hiring frenzy of 110 pilots per month that goes on for years. If there was a question at all it should have been: 32. Would you strike to get back from furlough at UAL: a. 300 pilots b. 600 pilots c. 900 pilots d. 1200 pilots e. 1547 pilots THEN they could go to the company and say "We took a survey and CAL pilots are willing to strike to get UAL pilots back on the property. What a surprise!" Sometimes how you word the question definitively predetermines the outcome. |
Forgive my ignorance, but was this a survey that was available to UAL pilots as well that I missed?
Thanks a bunch, Joe Peck UAL-IADFO |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:58 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands