|
CALFO:
I appreciate the MEC Chair for making the announcement they have come to an agreement because it shows respect and concern for me, his membership. However, I expect him to inform my rep with the details first and then my rep will let me know what's up and maybe even query his council, if need be, about how he should vote. I assume in this case my rep (which means me by representation) gets a vote on the agreement and it is not just signed by the MEC Chair as a side LOA. |
Originally Posted by Regularguy
(Post 1136193)
CALFO you don't get it at all.
The leader NEVER should reveal the info to the public BEFORE he informs his reps. DUMB DUMB DUMB to do so. Why it shows extreme lack of respect for them. |
Not trying to start an argument here, just saying that the two MEC's operate and communicate different. The CAL MEC is smaller, and is a pretty tight group. I would be surprised if the Reps had not been briefed before this was released. I also would be surprised if the TPA did not meet the expectations of the MEC.
|
Originally Posted by Regularguy
(Post 1136177)
Also note these differences, maybe just semantics, but differences all the same.
UAL MEC Chair: "...consider it for acceptance" CAL MEC Chair: "discuss...the anticipated timeline for completion and consideration ..." UAL MEC Chair: "We are United, Chairman, United Master Executive Council " CAL MEC Chair: nothing posted by poster so who knows how his signature went but maybe this is it "CAL MEC Chairman" See what you want but words reveal much so you all make your own conclusions. We are different and if nothing else is apparent during this merger, the difference between the two MECs would get first prize. Absolutely nothing wrong in how each MC communicated to their constituents...there's no smoke on this one. BTW we are "United" when we get a JCBA, ISL and a single MEC and then thats purely technical at best...being a family takes more than having the same name or living in the same house.. |
blah blah blah
Anyone know what the bidding provisions are?
|
Originally Posted by Regularguy
(Post 1136170)
CAL MEC Chair: and modifies the base and domicile provisions to allow for bases in IAH (UAL); and SFO, DEN and ORD (CAL). These bases will be staffed on a voluntary basis or through existing special assignment provisions. Just going backwards in domicile AGAIN. What else is new. |
CALFO
"You are assuming that the Reps haven't been informed. I would bet that all CAL reps have been briefed." I am assuming only what I read. You are assuming the rest. I have learned to believe what I read and just let the rest go to wishful thinking. As I said you guys make up your own ideas about what has shown in print. Mine are based on what I read with no assumptions at all. It says he will call them. |
CALFO:
"I also would be surprised if the TPA did not meet the expectations of the MEC. " I agree here with you 100% My post is to shed light on the methods and communication skills of the two men. The more I read and learn about (yes I have high friends on the UAL MEC) JP the more I believe he can not be trusted with confidential communications. I'll end with that. On the whole this is a very good move by the combined MECs. |
gettinbumped:
I don't think this is another job to the LUAL. It seems to mean we are moving forward to me towards a possible JCBA. There are a few very important issues coming at UAL with the most important being replacement narrow body airplane orders. The worst thing that could happen is for JP to go rogue with the LCAL MEC and side negotiate a new contract and lock up future airplane orders for LCAL pilots. I see this agreement as a good indication of that not happening. |
I think Capt. Pierce is doing an excellent job.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:53 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands