Isn't more training better? Where else would you like to cut our training Maverick?

What a douche.

More TRAINING? It's a checkride bonehead! Do they give you "warmup sessions" in the military? They never did when I was active duty. Sorry, but if you're that rusty, you shouldn't be flying a plane ACE. BTW, glad to hear you think we should have to give up ANOTHER DAY OFF without PAY. Anything else you wanna give the company slick? :cool:

:mad:
I feel the same way.
Thanks for putting it in words.
We need a contract now. Obviously our cultures at ual, and cal are different, but for the love of flip... Being 2 years into the merger with no contract is something that should not go unnoticed. How long is Calalpa going to be "bullish" happy with the pace of negotiations?

I always wanted to talk to the best pilot in the airline...finally found him:rolleyes:

Can you please explain how you're working an extra day without pay? You have me at a disadvantage there. In fact, I go to TK for a one day training event on Sunday...and get paid for TWO days since they can't fit it all into one duty period. That's 10 hours of actual and reserve time in my sked. Same goes for my Landings class on Tuesday. So I do TWO one day training events and get paid for FOUR days. Seriously, please explain how you're working a day with no pay.

As it turns out, in the military we do PLENTY of training on a regular basis. Have you ever seen an F-16 at Hi/Low/Base key? *** do you think they're doing? And yes, in the military we do a hell of a lot more 'training' than we do at UAL. It is a huge benefit to get into a sim and PRACTICE emergency procedures in a 'non checkride' status. You're aiming in the wrong direction with you're shots at my flying skills. Most pilots are smart enough to put their ego aside and take as much quality training as they can get. Most of the guys I ever knew who were too good for extra training turned out to be unable to fly out a wet paper bag at mach one.

That said...I don't work for free.

This thread is really drifting from the topic. That said, I'm sure you're quite the ace pilot :rolleyes:. I remember my first captain's bid too. :p

We'll see what co-worker Jeff,, er I mean Jay Pierce has to say tomorrow.

Honestly, what are you guys so scared about? Doesn't your anger and disgust with a company that has delayed negotiations for years make you want to get released. My bet is the company is trying to delay negotiations in the hope that the the NLRB will have a more "management friendly" composition after the election. Do you really want to wait another year? Delta is already working on negotiating their NEXT contract.

I think we've established our mutual distaste for each other's companies but we do have a mutual interest in securing an industry leading contract. Better pay, better work rules, better everything.

For the record, UAL check rides were 3 days until after the merger when they became 4 days. All the VP's of flight ops and training are from CAL. Just saying.

They are afraid of what the SLI will send their way. Much of what JP is doing is selling a better SLI for the CAL pilots when he is actually doing the work of Jeff and company. These guys are being sold out by JP - they just don't see it because they think they'll get a unwarranted windfall.

Dude,

You have serious issues.

I mean, I hate ual but I'm allowed, they furloughed me twice. But you are really full of vitriol.

Try xanax or maybe just cut back on the coffee a bit.

"Are the L-UAL pilots so "unprepared" that they need a warmup session? THAT is scary...............:eek:"

Really??

December 28, 1978 - 33+years ago!!! -Last time United Airlines lost a customer due to pilot error! :D We're doing something right...

EWRpilot:

"He has OUR interests at heart, NOT UAL's! Isn't that the way it's supposed to be? "

In the case of the ISL I might agree. In the case of the JCBA I will adamantly say as loud as I possibly can... NO!!!!!

I have never heard one of my reps say they were working solely on behalf of the UAL pilots for the JCBA. They know the JCBA is about ALL THE PILOTS AT UAL!!!!


"It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it."
AUNG SAN SUU KYI

Classic...

Guess they dont care at LUAL because they still are guaranteed 12 days off for the month and they are paid 2.8 hours for the training day. (which still sucks)

Pretty easy...........I'm on reserve..............I have to go on two of my DAYS OFF (since I only get 12 a month, I'm now down to 10, and add another and I'm down to 9!) We only get a pittance for our annual training events, but you guys want us to work another day for even less.

Ours were only two, and now they're three. Can't quite understand why they've changed as two days has worked for eons. :confused:

L-UAL pilots BEWARE.

When I read Otto's "two seperate contracts proposal" I shudder in disbelief. Take a short guess on how long it would take for CAL's saviors to be licking their chops over your most coveted flying.

I've smelled and been victimized by this stench my entire career. It wouldn't take two bid months for CAL to offer premium pay, line divisor relief up to 120 hours a month under special emergency FAA exemption and blessing and a virtual stampede to fly L-UAL routes and maybe even iron. Within a year, most if not all L-UAL flying would be transferred to "more efficient" L-CAL, while you guys worked out your "differences with the company".

I just hope that you don't lump us all into the same cesspool...

Tomorrow will be the test.

Found it .. from the Continental Contract '02:


--------------------------------------
Part 6 - Labor Disputes
A. It will not be a violation of the Agreement, and it will not be cause for discharge,
permanent replacement or any other disciplinary action if any Continental Pilot:
1. Refuses to operate “struck-work Company Flights,” meaning that:
a. The pilots of a carrier party to a Code-Share Agreement, Marketing
Agreement, Reciprocal Livery Agreement, or Revenue/Profit Sharing
Agreement are engaged in a lawful strike, and
b. In any rolling thirty (30) day period following the commencement of
the strike, the Company increases flights under the applicable
agreement and/or flights operated under the designator code of the
struck carrier or its Affiliates, measured against such Company flying
during the thirty (30) day period that ends two (2) full months before
the commencement of the strike; provided that this provision will not
apply to increased flights that were scheduled by the Company prior to
and irrespective of the existence of the lawful strike.
Provided, that it will not be considered to be performing struck-work Company
Flights to expand Company flying from Company Hubs or to continue to
transport passengers and/or cargo or mail within its route structure on its own
aircraft so long as the code or other designation of the struck carrier is not
placed on additional Company flights as described in Paragraph 1, and for any
such expanded flying of the Company:
a. The Company receives all of the revenue for the services it performs,
and
b. No financial benefit accrues to the struck carrier as a result of the
Company’s performance of such services, and
Section 1 - Recognition and Scope Part 7 - Successorship, Asset Sales and Mergers
1-14
c. City pairs operated by the struck carrier are not initiated by the
Company during the strike at the request of the struck carrier, or
2. Refuses to cross or chooses to honor the lawful picket lines of employees
employed by the Company, or any Affiliate of the Company; or
3. Refuses to undergo training or perform pilot work or services on the property
of another carrier during a lawful strike by that carrier’s pilots; or
4. Refuses to perform training of pilots for service as strike replacement pilots.
B. From the effective date of the Agreement through thirty (30) days following the date,
if any, that the parties are released from mediation by the National Mediation Board in
connection with negotiations for a successor Agreement (the “Release Date”), the
Association, including but not limited to its directors, officers, representatives and
agents, will not engage in, promote, or cause any strike or work stoppage at the
Company or Continental Micronesia, Inc., including but not limited to sympathy
strikes or recognition of picket lines at the Company or Continental Micronesia, Inc.,
and the Association will not otherwise support picket lines established at the Company
or Continental Micronesia, Inc., or cause any other organized job action at either such
company, provided, however, that this Paragraph B does not restrict the Association
and its directors, officers, representatives, and agents, from advising the Pilots of the
existence of a strike, picket line, or other labor dispute, and their rights with respect
thereto, or engaging in, promoting or causing any strike, work stoppage, refusal to
perform work or training, or refusal to cross a picket line permitted under Paragraph
A, and provided further that this Paragraph B applies to Continental Micronesia, Inc.
only as long as Continental Micronesia, Inc. flying is covered by the Agreement under
Part 3, Paragraph A.
C. The commitment stated in Paragraph B above will be inapplicable as of the Release
Date without regard to whether the parties are then engaged in collective bargaining
under the Act. The Company waives any claim that the commitment stated in
Paragraph B above remains applicable on or after the Release Date pursuant to the
Act’s status quo provisions or otherwise. During the period that the commitment in
Paragraph B above remains inapplicable, it is acknowledged that the Agreement will
contain no contractual prohibition on the ability of the Association and the pilots to
honor lawful picket lines.


----------------------

Continenal pilots are not compelled to cross a legal picket line. So, the "oh, I had to cross because my contract requires it" excuse won't fly. For anybody thinking they'd cross, don't ever hope to ride a jumpseat of an ALPA carrier again.

Crossers never put themselves in the need of a jumpseat.

You don't think that threat was made in '83? Didn't even slow anyone down. TO TOP IT OFF THEY"VE ALL BEEN FORGIVEN BY ALPA AND MOST WEAR PINS!!!!!

CB,

It's refreshing to hear your viewpoint and I'm sure that yours is not a minority voice. I hope like hell its the majority. As far as your caution, I hear you loud and clear. From what I have read here I agree with you and I am amazed at some guys opinions.

Let's hope we share a beer someday while toiling under an industry leading contract and "uniformly horrible" SLI.

^^^^^Yeah, good luck with that!!^^^^^

Unfortunately there's plenty of CAL-SCABS abound that wouldn't give two chits with regards the CBA provisions above. After all, they've already proved first hand that they can't be trusted as evidence of their actions years prior. I'm sure these SAME "boys/girls" would even punch the accelerator enough to run over their own mother while leaving their drive-ways to make the show times for the struck work.

When the rubber meets the road......In their minds, the above POS-CBA excerpt does not apply to "them" if it "benefits" them.....circa, '83-'85.:mad:

Pathetic

That sounds like a problem with your contract...not with training.

Just wondering, wasn't JH part of your NC.. the same NC that crafted your part of the TPA, the TPA that so many UAL pilots were not happy with?

I have stated before, that I would have welcomed a new MEC Chair last year when we had our elections.. but the reality was, due to the way ALPA National ByLaws are written, we don't get to choose. Our LEC's do and after speaking with my Rep, the choice was Jay or one other person.
Like it or not (and I know you guys don't like it..) Jay P was the better choice.

As others have stated, Jay has an interesting past. Some hate it, some don't care. But at the end of the day, he's our MEC and he's suppose to be working with your guy. Until recently, Jay P was quoted as saying he spoke with your Jay often.
So.. for this to happen the way it did is unacceptable.

We'll now where this is headed in the next day, next few weeks and months, and by this time next year.
At this point, I'm no longer positive about this merger..

Motch


PS> For any mistake our side has made, there has been an equal mistake made by your side. But last time I looked, we were suppose to be in a JOINT Negotiation.. yet your MEC has decided to request release for the UAL side.. not alot of "Joint" in there.

Prediction...and an easy one at that.

Jay Pierce will not be on board with the UAL-MEC.

He is probably meeting or met with Fred today to discuss the plan of action....just like he did with regards to the SOC training issue last fall. Why else would he back the company on that? Oh wait.. maybe it was worth $40M.

Fred and the company will offer to negotiate a separate contract to Jay and the CAL pilots if Jay p. agrees not to get on board with the UAL_MEC.

Jay p. will announce tomorrow that this will be the road going forward and the UAL-MEC will be free to do what they want and the CAL MEC will do what THEY want. Similar to the PS deal he made. Why should this be any different than ALL the past behavior he has displayed?

Boxer..
If that does happen, and the CAL MEC decides to go it alone, they will have my support.
I was against the ProShar deal, and have stated that often.

But for the UAL MEC to request release based on a timeline WITHOUT talking to the CAL MEC, when we are in JOINT Negotiations.. is unacceptable.

Again, had your guys had discussions with our guys last week and stated this was coming, I would have supported a Joint Message.
That did not happen.

And, after reading your MEC's News from last night where he mentions the "Unfriendly Skies" Campaign.. it's obvious that your side has been planning to go it alone at some point.

So be it.

Motch

You guys go ahead and go it alone .. cross legal picket lines. Your contract allows you to honor other pilots' picket line. The question is, does your HONOR compel you to. UAL pilots won't stay at a hotel with a struck work force let alone cross another airlines' picket line.

Jack London's "Ode to a Scab", 1915, is as follows:

"After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, and the vampire, He had some awful substance left with which He made a scab. A scab is a two-legged animal with a corkscrew soul, a waterlogged brain, and a combination backbone made of jelly and glue. Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles.

When a scab comes down the street, men turn their backs and angels weep in heaven, and the devil shuts the gates of hell to keep him out. No man has a right to scab as long as there is a pool of water deep enough to drown his body in, or a rope long enough to hang his carcass with. Judas Iscariot was a gentleman compared with a scab. For betraying his Master, he had character enough to hang himself. A scab hasn't.

Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. Judas Iscariot sold his savior for thirty pieces of silver. Benedict Arnold sold his country for a promise of a commission in the British Army. The modern strikebreaker sells his birthright, his country, his wife, his children, and his fellow men for an unfulfilled promise from his employer, trust, or corporation."

Other options include petioning ALPA national to decertify the CAL MEC (yes, that's allowed in the by laws). You guys want a fight, so do I. I'd prefer to fight with coworker Jeff, but after 4 years of stalled negotiations, I'm ****ed and ready for a fight with anyone. Jesus, man up.

In the above, you 'assume' A LOT.

Tomorrow (Friday), what happens if CAL's MEC announces they will go at it alone in light of the L-UA MEC's recent declaration?? If L-CAL does go at it alone, AND the NMB tells the L-UA MEC to "pound-sand" on being released come June 1st, WHAT 'legal picket line' would be there for you to hang your hat on considering the above assumption you make?

Until we get some direction as to what the CAL-MEC decides to embark upon following Heppener's announcement this week, cut the 'chicken-chested' READY-FIRE-AIM rhetoric......It does very little for the cause until tomorrows news/outcome/direction.

In a last-ditch effort, let's try to keep heads straight and realize that the "sum is greater than the parts" as we stand toe-to-toe against MGT.

A lot of "if's" in that last post .. My argument isn't with you, socal .. relax. I'm just trying to hold a line. I'll walk away from this F**&'d up industry before I'll walk on my brothers' backs to advance my career. Not chest pounding, more like .. head poundning, wondering how ANY of my CAL co-workers could even CONSIDER not honoring a UAL line.

You are correct, though .. tomorrow will tell the tale of L-CAL and whether they go down the right path or the wrong path. I STILL assert that decertification of the CAL MEC is a valid option to pursue.

Frats,

The EWR LEC reps are Pierce stooges. Whatever he tells them to do...they do it. The EWR reps represent no one but Pierce. Jay was the better choice? Choice for what? Management helper? Can't wait to see what Pierce comes up with. For what it's worth, I support the UAL MEC and their attempt to jump start something...anything! More than Baron and Cook and Pierce have done since they've been in office. I can't wait for the Denver elections for reps. That's when Baron and Cook end up as nothing more than a footnote when it comes to the power they think they hold. Frankly, IMO Pierce is being painted into a corner. It's not that he is being pressured by the membership. He is being pressured by management to get this contract done in their favor. Pierce does have an interesting past. A management past. He has not changed his spots. Pierce may be you "guy", but he's definitely not mine.

I'm with you on that one. It's too bad that CALALPA has a few bad apples that have a strangle hold on the dues paying members. A union is a good thing, Just not ALPA.

Building off of our earlier communications this week about the potential of seeking an April 30 release in response to Management's continued efforts put the negotiations in a holding pattern, I wanted to update you on some specific steps we have taken.

In particular, I want you to know that we have assembled the most highly-qualified campaign team to bolster our strategic approach and complement our ability to execute our long-term game plan.

Leading the effort is Jon Yarowksy, a partner at Patton Boggs in Washington, DC who is a former senior White House advisor to President Clinton, former General Counsel to the House Judiciary Committee (where he provided advice Members of Congress and Leadership) and very close to both the Obama White House and key players on the Hill (he was also a tailback for UCLA in the mid-seventies).

Working with Jon on the communications side is Chris Lehane and Mark Fabiani of Fabiani & Lehane. Mark and Chris are both former Clinton White House advisors, served as aides to Vice President Al Gore and are well-known Democratic operatives who have helped run various presidential, gubernatorial and senatorial campaigns.

Working with them, we have developed a comprehensive campaign to fight for all United pilots that will be called “The Unfriendly Skies."

Jon, Mark and Chris all worked together in the Clinton White House and have collaborated on successful efforts over the years. They are aggressive and proactive - and have a very simple philosophy: Play to Win.

“The Unfriendly Skies" campaign, which was discussed in a recent labor meeting in Chicago, is scheduled to be launched in conjunction with the summer travel season and will focus on the company's off-shoring of flights and out-sourcing of pilot jobs.

The campaign is expected to focus on issues such as the compromised safety for passengers and loss of jobs for America’s pilots. Additionally, we intend to have a specific social media effort designed to pro-actively reach out to consumers in order to minimize any possible disruption in their summer travel plans.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++
The above is the message from the UAL MEC Chair from 18 April 2012.

Again, your MEC has decided to break the "Joint" Negotiations.. not the CAL MEC.
You want to try and decert the CAL MEC, I say go for it. But at the same time, be careful what you wish for and since you think that ALPA National will side with you, why don't you try and pull that trigger.

Did JH consult with ALPA National before pulling the Release trigger?
Did the UAL MEC have a joint meeting last week to approve this release timetable?
Why hasn't one UAL Pilot answered any of those questions?

Again.. not one CAL Pilot EVER talked about going it alone- until your MEC put out a message that basically states their desire to be released by a certain timeline if their demands aren't met.
Your MEC put out a News Blast the other night detailing what they have done to start THEIR campaign; "The Unfriendly Skies".
Your MEC is the one that pulled the Release trigger prematurely, without consulting the CAL MEC.

There won't be any strike of one side that would give the other side a chance to cross a picket line. And the majority of the pilots I know on the CAL side would not cross a line if it ever happened anyway.
But what may happen, and wouldn't surprise me if it does- is the "New United" trying to get a separate deal now (which is kinda what you want, it seems) on the CAL side and then to continue to grow the CAL side to the detriment of the UAL side.
{I hope I'm wrong on this~}

Again, if that happens we will merely have to look back onto April 2012 to see where the blame lies.

Motch

Oh, and I guess UAL ALPA (or I really should say- some of it's members?!) now thinks it would be ok to try and decert the CAL MEC..
do we get any say in that, or does the UAL MEC just take over the CAL MEC?

Yeah, this is going in the right direction~

Motch

So I guess you decide what is the "right path or the wrong path"?
Nice..

And who ever said anything about not honoring a UAL Line?
But I do find it amusing that you think that there would ever be a release followed by a strike on one side of a Joint Negotiations without the other side also being released.

Your MEC pulled the "Release Trigger" too early, and did it without the approval or backing of the CAL MEC. The NMB isn't stupid and they will see this as what it is, grandstanding and political posturing.. something that shouldn't have been done.
The next question will be, what does the NMB do about it.

Motch

Motch,

This is the EASILY predictable outcome of the actions of YOUR leadership. Pierce, et al sacrificed any notion of unity long ago in their quest for SLI advantages! Exactly how long did you expect the UAL pilots to tolerate that behavior?? I was VERY clear in my direction to my LEC reps after Pierce broke ranks with the Morse and negotiated a CAL specific monetary improvement to the CBA. I was also VERY clear in my communications with Lee Moak about the fallout from such behavior if he didn't do something about it. Well, now it appears that the chickens are coming home to roost, and there is no one to blame but your own leadership.

The UAL pilots, and the UAL MEC, have been open to joint communication, joint effort, and joint action since this merger began. The major impediment to all of those things was your MEC's (in the form of JP mostly) unashamed pursuit of potential advantage in the SLI!

So I support this action by my MEC because it accomplished multiple things. It will actually MOVE THE JCBA PROCESS AHEAD! Release or no release, you can bet your arse that this will generate movement. BTW, JH or the UAL MEC have NOT requested release...they put the company on notice that the WILL do it if they don't get serious in concrete ways (no more unfilled promises). Second, it FINALLY rips the power of the negotiations that JP and your MEC has been using to hold the UAL side hostage to SLI demands. You know very well that JB was serious when he addressed the UAL MEC - because that's exactly what's transpired since! You also know that JP was serious when he told my LEC FO rep that 'this is all about the SLI'! Third, this will put ALPA National and Lee Moak in a position to proactively and overtly SUPPORT us. At the very least, we'll get to see everyone's real stripes. Looking at the big picture, this move is not something that benefits UAL pilots over CAL pilots in any way! This move is good for ALL of us. The only thing that could be divisive is your MEC and JP failing to do the right thing.

I know this will cause hurt feelings and bruised egos, but as I tell people about internal ALPA politics -- I DON'T CARE about anyone's hurt feelings. What I care about is getting this profession and career back on track - and that starts with a JCBA.

Can you explain this please?

It accomplished multiple things............list them please


It will move the JCBA process ahead....how so?


What movement will it generate? backwards forwards and why.


BTW. Why do you think the CAL MEC NC Chair Mark Adams resigned a while back? Was there some silly stuff going on back then that led to this? What exactly was going on behind the scenes that accomplished multiple things, sped the process ahead, and generated all that movement?

I submit it did not accomplished multiple "positive" things, it will put a stranglehold on the JCBA process, and it generated negative/backwards movement. This is the case because of the recent LC communications from CAL MEC reps to their constituents directly, and as evidenced by the calling of a special MEC meeting in IAH to discuss what to do about it. They didn't need to call a special MEC meeting to clap their hands at UAL MEC's comments. The CAL MEC could have written a nice follow on speach and published it and/or released a press release in full support of UAL MEC's new "direction." I wonder why they chose to call that speicial meeting.....not to spend money and order more Johny's Pizza. The Pizza is good, but not that good.

[QUOTE=Ottolillienthal;1172477]

Re-read the post. I listed 3 things.

We will very publicly state that this merger is NOT going well and the the pilot group is NOT happy with the progress of the negotiations and is PREPARED TO STRIKE. That is exactly the message sent by asking for a release from the NMB. To date, we have not sent that message. The primary audiences are the financial community, politicians, and the employees of UAL.


I don't know why your committee members do what they do.... Please enlighten me on this subject, you clearly have something to say.

The JCBA process, at this point, is COMPLETELY OUT OF OUR CONTROL! The company has a long term plan that they've been executing and they plan to give us a JCBA AS LATE AS POSSIBLE. We need to change their calculus (without a job action!). I'd be interested to hear how you think this will 'stranglehold' the JCBA or move it backwards...
No doubt. The problem is that your MEC and MC's strategy has been to pursue every possible advantage in the SLI. This will definitely result in a change to that strategy. They no longer have a UAL pilot group that will sit quietly and watch our careers be threatened by your MEC and MC's actions. This strategy being unveiled by the UAL MEC is one that will advance ALL of our interests.

[QUOTE=AxlF16;1172489]
I respectfully disagree. While I long for a unified aproach I don't see it occuring.

There are simply too many moving parts, too much buerocracy, too much ALPA policy, too many players with different agendas, too many "chiefs", too many naive reps, too many uninformed reps, too many diverging interests to make this happen right now.

I think some cooling off is in order from both MEC's.

I think some monthly joint MEC meetings will need to take place after the appropriate cooling off.

I think Lee Moak better get his head out of the sand. If this goes bad, this is likely the end of ALPA. They'll be re-naming this the "regional Airline Pilots Association." It sort of already is that thanks to John Prater.

More and more mainline jobs get outsourced to regionals and over-seas airlines and what is ALPA doing about it? That's our primary threat!! We better get unified around that pretty quick, or we all need to go out and do the ex-pat thing.

The JCBA process hit a major snag 2 plus years ago with the departure of CAL NC Chair Mark Adams. It hasn't been the same since. He had a strong background in financial negotiations in a previous life. He was very good.

He is and was a genuis. I believe from speaking with UAL NC folks back then that there was much respect and that the relationship was very productive. He had the company jumping pretty high when he was at the table.

He resigned because of fairly immature goings on back then. Basically, when added up there was no deal to be had, so he backed away. Now CAL MEC gives us the PBS/scheduling guy as our new MEC Chair.

This gives us a major rub. PBS doesn't honor seniority. This is due to: lack of seniority locking, methodology of absence capture, non-contractural mandate by management to assign all trips, homogonization of flight time, moving target staffing model; also non contractural and completely within the company's perogative under the management rights clause (previous 10% reserve complement in CBA 97).

So, we got the PBS facilitator, who in my mind helps the company every month by propping up PBS now negotiaitng for us. What kind of PBS monster is ahead for us.........................

Sorry, I am on a new subject now.

Forgot what we were talking about. Oh yeah, JCBA process. It's all Jeffed up.

I understand your point, but I disagree with your fatalism and your solution. It IS possible to achieve unity between the MECs. I think the pilot groups ARE unified in our desires (JCBA and stable career). As I stated before, we need to get the best JCBA we can get, and let the SLI process take care of itself. As it stands, the CAL MEC and MC are intermingling the JCBA and SLI which is causing problems! Let's get them to focus on the near rocks and stop trying to control the uncontrollable.


This part I wholeheartedly agree with! I would suggest an MEC 'retreat' in a desolate area with locked doors! I would make Moak attend as well. I laid all of this out to Moak in an email exchange a couple of months ago. The problem is that all parties must be willing to engage in this type of unity in order to have the trust necessary for unified action. It's never too late to focus on our COMMON CRUCIAL goals and get our act together. Hopefully this can be the catalyst of that movement.

I agree about the threat of regional and alliance growth, but the solution lies mostly in our JCBA scope. Legislative cover would be nice, but it's not worth betting the farm on it. My most pressing concern right now is the JCBA!

I hear ya. The bottom line is that even Chuck Norris (or Tim Martins) couldn't negotiate a JCBA with UCH right now because they are unwilling to complete the negotiations. Hell, if we can't get a great contract with TWO negotiating committees, then we're truly boned.:eek:

I dunno, has anyone actually tried calling Tim Martins yet? I say we leave no stone unturned. Since he always has his flashlight for daytime walkarounds I bet he could see what's underneath that stone.....

It would be better than what we have now. I am tired of being held hostage by CALALPA.