|
Originally Posted by cal73
(Post 1053992)
Now is not a good time for this. Let's stay focused.
|
Originally Posted by cal73
(Post 1053992)
Now is not a good time for this. Let's stay focused.
Some of us on the UAL side know what your MEC has been doing for some time now. Pierce and his MEC cronnies are the problem. I don't blame the CAL line guys, but his motives are obvious and disturbing. |
Originally Posted by FACSofLife
(Post 1054266)
That's funny you should say this. The CAL MEC is focused, but not on what's good for all including the UAL types.
Some of us on the UAL side know what your MEC has been doing for some time now. Pierce and his MEC cronnies are the problem. I don't blame the CAL line guys, but his motives are obvious and disturbing. Until the pilot groups are combined, there are two MEC's with their own elected reps and officers, each looking out for their own respective pilot groups. We operate according to the TPA and joint committee structure until the combination point. When we're combined, it becomes one MEC with combined councils and new officer elections. Do you think they should conduct themselves otherwise? And...just how is changing organizations in the middle of a merger and joint negotiations going to change all this? I'm all ears. |
Originally Posted by cal73
(Post 1053992)
Now is not a good time for this. Let's stay focused.
|
Originally Posted by Andy
(Post 1054310)
I favor an inhouse union but not now. It shouldn't be discussed until after JCBA and SLI.
IMHO it'll be YEARS before a JCBA is done if we keep doing what we've been doing for the last 10 years. We will be too old to fly at this pace. SLI are you kidding me? See USAPA ! If we don't find A WAY now, either thru recalling both MC's and their cronies or saying see ya to ALPA we will never see a better day! |
Originally Posted by mrfurlough
(Post 1054318)
Andy,
IMHO it'll be YEARS before a JCBA is done if we keep doing what we've been doing for the last 10 years. We will be too old to fly at this pace. SLI are you kidding me? See USAPA ! If we don't find A WAY now, either thru recalling both MC's and their cronies or saying see ya to ALPA we will never see a better day! |
Originally Posted by FACSofLife
(Post 1054266)
That's funny you should say this. The CAL MEC is focused, but not on what's good for all including the UAL types.
Some of us on the UAL side know what your MEC has been doing for some time now. Pierce and his MEC cronnies are the problem. I don't blame the CAL line guys, but his motives are obvious and disturbing. There are TWO MEC's representing TWO different groups when it come right down to it at this present time. With the vast dynamics in which we (UAL and CAL ALPA) are working/dealing with against MGT as one, I honestly think WE (both pilot groups) are doing a fairly reasonable job of keeping focused on the goal of a obtaining a strong JCBA. From the start, this is something that many of us knew that "J-LO" would not make easy, and up to this point, "like it or not", it has lived up to it's expectations. As far as the above....."The CAL MEC is focused, but not what's good for all including the UAL types".....I would have to disagree. CAL ALPA whole-heartedly voiced it's support with assuring from day one in the TPA that IF CAL hired during the transition period, it would extend those positions FIRST to ALL UAL Furloughs in seniority order. As this idea/concept has been thumbed down by some, I understand. It's NOT a recall, and I am NOT calling it that. In the same breath to say that CAL's MEC has NOT done "what's good for ALL UAL types", with that, your view falls on deaf ears for some. It is my view (as well as several other CAL Pilots who I have flown with), that CAL's MEC has done a 'good job' up to this point is looking out for the UAL 'partner' Pilot Group in this Merger during the Transitional Period thus far. It has supported it's UAL ALPA brothers in it's attempt to offer those who WANT a job, the opportunity to have one if they so choose....And NO, I'm NOT a 'rah-rah' ALPA kool-aid drinker....so don't even go there. May want to re-think the stance above. |
Originally Posted by SoCalGuy
(Post 1054328)
^^^^^^As the "'Ol Capt" stated above, would have to agree^^^^^^
There are TWO MEC's representing TWO different groups when it come right down to it at this present time. With the vast dynamics in which we (UAL and CAL ALPA) are working/dealing with against MGT as one, I honestly think WE (both pilot groups) are doing a fairly reasonable job of keeping focused on the goal of a obtaining a strong JCBA. From the start, this is something that many of us knew that "J-LO" would not make easy, and up to this point, "like it or not", it has lived up to it's expectations. As far as the above....."The CAL MEC is focused, but not what's good for all including the UAL types".....I would have to disagree. CAL ALPA whole-heartedly voiced it's support with assuring from day one in the TPA that IF CAL hired during the transition period, it would extend those positions FIRST to ALL UAL Furloughs in seniority order. As this idea/concept has been thumbed down by some, I understand. It's NOT a recall, and I am NOT calling it that. In the same breath to say that CAL's MEC has NOT done "what's good for ALL UAL types", with that, your view falls on deaf ears for some. It is my view (as well as several other CAL Pilots who I have flown with), that CAL's MEC has done a 'good job' up to this point is looking out for the UAL 'partner' Pilot Group in this Merger during the Transitional Period thus far. It has supported it's UAL ALPA brothers in it's attempt to offer those who WANT a job, the opportunity to have one if they so choose....And NO, I'm NOT a 'rah-rah' ALPA kool-aid drinker....so don't even go there. May want to re-think the stance above. |
Originally Posted by FACSofLife
(Post 1054385)
Thanks for the offer, but right now my stance does not need to be rethought. I do appreciate your perspective believe it or not and think you have some valid points. I just don't like Pierce's Trojan Horse.
All ears....Please explain?? |
Originally Posted by FACSofLife
(Post 1054385)
...I just don't like Pierce's Trojan Horse.
If you're talking about a campaign for a new chairman/officer positions when the MEC's combine, he should campaign for the position if he so chooses. He's one of the better chairmen our MEC has seen in the last 12 years. The old UAL councils would be well served. In any case, the new MEC would have at least an additional four councils (CAL has a flight instructor council) and all reps of the new MEC choose the chairman. I hate to state the obvious, but that means the old UAL reps get their individual votes for the head of the table as does everybody else. You will have zero to do with it unless you have the ear of your rep. If this is off base, what the h### are you talking about? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:30 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands