Search
Notices

Scope 6-14-12

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-14-2012, 04:26 PM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Flyguppy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: IAH 320 CA
Posts: 190
Default

"All the other LCAL councils" remaining quiet is no more.

IAH just put out that they are down to Compensation, Scope, and economic R&I items.

As if those were no big deal........

LCAL councils, shut the **** up already!!!! Let it run it's course.
Flyguppy is offline  
Old 06-14-2012, 06:01 PM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 439
Default

Originally Posted by Regularguy View Post
This LCAL Council 153 are chumps for putting this out so near to the planned deadline of the 15th. All they are doing is starting gossip about a section NO ONE HAS ANY IDEA ABOUT!

You might notice all the other LCAL and LUAL councils ahev remained quite and are letting the JNT do their work.

So it is a bad thing to put out and these men need to be horse whipped for violating the trust of 12000 pilots during a critical phase of negotiation.

Shame on your three!!!!
Exactly we hopefully will have plenty of time to discuss merits of this once it gets done. Now is not the time for side shows. Stay United.
El10 is offline  
Old 06-14-2012, 07:18 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 234
Default

Do you know the LAX reps? This is a poor response.

Originally Posted by Regularguy View Post
This LCAL Council 153 are chumps for putting this out so near to the planned deadline of the 15th. All they are doing is starting gossip about a section NO ONE HAS ANY IDEA ABOUT!

You might notice all the other LCAL and LUAL councils ahev remained quite and are letting the JNT do their work.

So it is a bad thing to put out and these men need to be horse whipped for violating the trust of 12000 pilots during a critical phase of negotiation.

Shame on your three!!!!
bearcat is offline  
Old 06-14-2012, 07:37 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Imo we need to see the final language of a TA. The TA also needs a comparison, section by section of the CAL and UAL contracts. Finally, the spin miesters need to stay away and let the pilots make their own, informed decisions.
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 06-15-2012, 12:05 AM
  #15  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 45
Default

No...we need to head any concessions off at the pass before it becomes a TA. ANY TA presented to this pilot group will pass.
Zonker is offline  
Old 06-15-2012, 03:31 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Originally Posted by Zonker View Post
No...we need to head any concessions off at the pass before it becomes a TA. ANY TA presented to this pilot group will pass.
Isn't that the job of the MEC? If the MEC's vote no then it will not be presented to the membership. I'm totally in favor of zero concessions in any section. Do we want want individual LEC's or it's members cherry picking the negotiating process?
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 06-15-2012, 03:37 AM
  #17  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 45
Default

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking View Post
Isn't that the job of the MEC? If the MEC's vote no then it will not be presented to the membership. I'm totally in favor of zero concessions in any section. Do we want want individual LEC's or it's members cherry picking the negotiating process?

Based on the past rushed sales job of an egregiously concessionary contract last time around, cherry picking, nit picking, whatever....is definitely in order.
Zonker is offline  
Old 06-15-2012, 05:25 AM
  #18  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: IAH 737 CA
Posts: 690
Default

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking View Post
Isn't that the job of the MEC? If the MEC's vote no then it will not be presented to the membership. I'm totally in favor of zero concessions in any section. Do we want want individual LEC's or it's members cherry picking the negotiating process?

The CAL pilots have NEVER voted no on any TA placed before them since 1995. If we can head a train wreck off at the pass, why not do so? Letting it run it's course is what got us the POS C02 we still suffer under now, or are most guys happy with reserve double-pump, VJM, and no snap-back provisions?
EWR73FO is offline  
Old 06-15-2012, 05:27 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 133
Default

Originally Posted by EWR73FO View Post
So you are for giving into this and capitulating to the company on scope just to have the contract done by 5PM tomorrow?
So EWR, do you now understand the frustration of myself and all the other posters? L-CAL LEC's need to let the first string do their job and not bite at the ankles of those actually doing the negotiating. Don't try to bait me into your typical personal attacks. I don't know you personally, but from your positions on this board, it would be a real quiet flight if we are ever crewed together.
Freddriver5 is offline  
Old 06-15-2012, 06:11 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

I completely understand what you guys are saying. If we give each MEC member a line item veto, we are going to get a contract when?

This topic underscores the importance of LEC elections btw.
SpecialTracking is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TANSTAAFL
Major
79
03-09-2011 04:50 PM
yamahas3
Major
27
02-12-2011 06:41 AM
AAflyer
Major
101
03-27-2010 06:39 AM
Toccata
Cargo
2
08-09-2007 09:40 AM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
1
09-28-2005 05:40 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices