Don't follow this analogy. What he said is that our MEC is using delay tactics with regards to the JCBA. How so? How is my MEC delaying the JCBA? What specifically are our tactics? What is their motivation for delay?

The last time I checked there were two Unions negotiating against management. Hence the J in JCBA. Both parties (yes, BOTH) agree that the process is too slow. One party has decided to take matters into their own hands and is demanding the other party come along for the ride. One party has declined to brief the other party on its strategy.

I am ready and anxious to wrap this up, so we can all integrate seniority and sign KumBaYa. However, I am not anxious to blindly follow the leader of UMEC into battle when he isn't even confident enough in his plan to brief his ALLY at CalMEC. If this is such a great plan, then why not share it with the other party that you are supposed to be working with?

If the plan makes sense, then let's go and I'll be happy to lead the charge. If not, then please stop stirring the pot for the sake of stirring the pot.

I want a industry leading contract!!!

A...greed.

It's not a matter of your interpretation of a good plan or people lining up to lead the charge. It's a matter of direction from the leadership. JP does more to stir the pot with his whining about not being advised of UAL MEC actions and sending a message to the company that these are not his actions and he's still a friend of Jeff's.

Can you tell us what is JP's plan - I'm sure it makes sense?

I have no idea what JP's plan is. Until recently, I thought both MEC's were following the same plan. If the parties felt that plan wasn't working then I expect BOTH parties to agree on a new plan. What I don't expect is for one party to change the course of the negotiations without consulting the other party.

The CAL MEC has risen to the occasion however by agreeing to support the plan by JH that will lead to a JCBA. The one caveat being that they still need to see the plan and agree that it makes sense. Is that so much to ask?

By the way, JH tipped off Jeff well before JP started "whining." The moment that JP announced HIS decision it was pretty well evident that he hadn't consulted JP. Imagine if he had consulted JP and if THEY had issued a joint statement. I believe it is called Unity.

I let you slide on the rest, but how was it evident that JH hadn't consulted JP beforehand?

Why not have joint MEC meetings after or before the regular individual MEC meetings? JP won't go for it, but it would show unity. May even be a good idea for the UAL MEC to notify all members of the CAL MEC of it's intent to act instead of just JP. JP won't be able to deny the communication if all the CAL MEC knows.

I guess you missed the part where I said "both sides".

OU...You are aware that the agreement for a mid june TA completion a day before JH unilateral decison ( with all partners, to include our lead NMB rep and his boss) potentially violated good faith. In fact my concern now is if the NMB states no to the request, which is highly likely, then JH just gave the company an out to delay negotiations further and the mid JUne agreement is off the table. They can ask for it to be removed BTW...hiring lobbyist? The company has lobbyist also, so the impact on the NMB is fools gold. Our leverage was the timeline that all agreed upon, with the NMB leadership in the room..and if the company delayed or backed out, give us greater leverage and the NMB for release...Hope is not a strategy, and it appears that's exactly what JH is resting upon...Hoping the NMB will say yes...

I was referring to another post that used a "chest thumping" reference. I missed your whole post - Sorry!

JP's self preservation actions scare me more - let's see what JP does to undermine the JH effort. I bet you're hoping the company gives us an industry leading contract out of kindness. Stand Tall - Show Strength.