AirTran management pilots

[Lear70]

Hey where were the 4 out of seven based?

In bases that are smaller than ATL and, thus, are easier to recall representatives. More on this later.

Here is another stumper: Why wasn't LH recalled? Surely the pilot group would fire the president.

Here's a more important stumper: if you think recalling LH is necessary, why have the new reps, who were allegedly elected to fix what the recalled reps weren't doing, not done so? Hmmmm....

The reason is that we can't reach them. Anyones throat we could get our boot on is out of Union work. I don't have to explain to anyone on flight info how hard it is to get fired from a Union. We fired all the Atlanta reps that voted no.

The majority that I speak of are based in Atlanta. Please tell me that you aren't using the logic that 2 bases are greater than 1 so the majority didn't want a vote. You silly goose, you are supposed to count the pilots, not the bases.

The point I'm trying to make is that if so many of the TOTAL pilots at AirTran were so upset at the MEC, it would include the MCO and MKE pilots, correct? So here's the kicker... in a smaller base, it's EASIER to recall reps. All you need is one person to call for a special meeting with that on the agenda, then take enough like-minded people with you to the meeting to pass the resolution, then send it to the pilots. If the pilots were as angry at the MEC as you say, there at LEAST would have been a recall MEETING. But there wasn't. Not even ONE pilot in MCO or MKE even wanted to put it on the agenda and try.

The ATL meeting was a lynch mob. Plain and simple. People got their pound of flesh and that was cathartic enough to end it there.

Saw you at the roadshow. No need to call. You were an instant classic. "When I got to Dallas it was real clear that our negotiating team was right. They didn't seem to care if we were ever got integrated."

Your analysis was spot on. I would like to have voted on AIP1 because I don't have to go to Dallas to come to the same conclusion.

If you're going to quote me, get it right. That's not what I said. I never said the Merger Committee was right. I never said that Southwest didn't care if we ever got INTEGRATED.

For the record, the Merger Committee, even in PRIVATE meetings, prior to the vote on SIA 1 and the following Gary Kelly letter, NEVER stated the threats as severely as they later started saying AFTER the GK letter and work on SIA 2 began. So there wasn't anything that the Merger Committee was "right" about concerning the threats. That's just a fact.

Secondly, what I *DID* say at that meeting was that it was obvious that the push to get a negotiated settlement wasn't there when we were in Dallas for the 2nd round like it was the 1st. They didn't seem to care if we chose to come to an agreement or whether they started pursuing exploring their options of non-integration. I also stated that I believed they had every intention of playing the non-integration scenario out and seeing what happened if we turned down their offer. Lastly, when asked if I was going to vote Yes or No, I replied that I had applied in the past to work at Southwest, although not having an application currently on file, and that I was personally choosing to take the offer rather than continuing to fight with a questionable outcome and a pilot group that clearly was telegraphing they weren't interested in a fight either, but that each person's vote was up to them to make.

In my opinion, the only thing fighting in that scenario would have done was to have put us in a Morris Air position.

So if you're going to quote me, quote me accurately (we video taped it, although it never made it to the pilot group, if you'd like to go by the ALPA office and watch it, I'm sure they'd let you).

Again, this is water under the bridge. The point I'm trying to make is that some people feel the way you do having wanted to vote for SIA 1, and some people feel upset that the option for arbitration with integration as promised by the Process Agreement was taken from them. NEITHER of those are anger at Southwest pilots and BOTH of those feelings are going to take a while to subside. They will eventually, and it's probably helpful that integration is going to take so long, letting the people who are aggravated stay at AirTran for a while and letting those who aren't head on over, but in the end it'll be just fine.

 

[Britpilot]

Lear....i think you know the answer to why only 3 reps were recalled. MKE and MCO pilots received zero protections in AIP1, they are small domiciles, their reps actually spoke with each pilot there. The two MKE reps were yes votes until the final minutes as a sign of solidarity. A VAST MAJORITY of the 1522 ATL pilots wanted a vote on AIP1. The "threats " should have been communicated with tge pilot group. If the MEC was unified, this pilot group would have supported them. I wanted a vote due to the fact that my union leadership was divided on the interpretation of Gary Kelly's comments on 7/14. Since they were in disagreement on the weight of the threats, they should have sent it out to a vote!!

Spot on.
We were misled and lied to. Unforgivable.

 

[Lear70]

Got a text from a buddy today who asked me to clarify the above statement regarding private discussions with MC members.

In private discussions *I* had with MC members, PRIOR to SIA 1, they never said the threats were anything near as severe as they became later, and when asked what the odds of a non-integration scenario were, they said "they were very minimal, vote on the package, not the threats." The attorneys said the same thing when I talked with them one-on-one at the MEC meeting.

Shoot forward a week, everyone's story changed.

The MEC members all have different recollections, which is the problem in a nutshell. One rep will say the MC never said there were "dire risks" and another rep will say they were all directly threatened with the very scenario that came to light after SIA 1 was rejected.

So yes, again, there's plenty of blame to go around, and it's still water under the bridge. I'm moving on... life's too short to stay mad at something that simply isn't going to change. As I've said before... if I knew then what the MC said they privately believed BEFORE SIA 1, that this was the probable outcome, you wouldn't have seen me at the ATL MEC meeting.

And no, I have no interest in future union work, Cometman. I only got involved in this after LH and MEC officers called me directly and asked. Once we get through the transition, I will happily go back to being just another line guy. I have to say, it's been an interesting look "behind the curtain". I just have no tolerance for the political games...

 

[Kenney G]

Spot on.
We were misled and lied to. Unforgivable.

Are you saying all 7 reps that voted no were lying? Or all the ATL reps were lying? Or just one? And if so does that mean the other reps were just pathetic sheep with no opinions of their own on what was a fair senority list and the advice from outside (not ALPA) advice that our protections were good?
You keep throwing out blanket statements. I'm sure you are pissed but please try and include some facts to go alone with your claims.
BTW you still haven't answered the question of the claim you threw out there that the reps had personal agendas.

 

[Britpilot]

Like I said, ask around.
The truth is out there Moulder.

 

[j41driver]

disregard....next time I'll read the whole thread before speaking up...

 

[Kenney G]

Like I said, ask around.
The truth is out there Moulder.

Ask around? You are the one making claims of agendas and lies. I'm just asking you to back up your claims and educate myself and the rest of the forum that is reading this thread.

I think it speaks volumes about your character that you throw out accusations and can not and will not back them up with facts.

 

[Britpilot]

Ask around? You are the one making claims of agendas and lies. I'm just asking you to back up your claims and educate myself and the rest of the forum that is reading this thread.

I think it speaks volumes about your character that you throw out accusations and can not and will not back them up with facts.

You don't know me or my character so if it makes you feel better then:
Nobody lied, nobody had a personal agenda and nobody mislead the pilots.
There now, all better?

 

[Kenney G]

You don't know me or my character so if it makes you feel better then:
Nobody lied, nobody had a personal agenda and nobody mislead the pilots.
There now, all better?

Feel better? No. I wan't your answer. It still speaks volumes about your character that you can't back your claims up with facts. No I don't know you personally and I belive I am better for it. I prefer to have friends with character and conviction, something your ideas and thoughts on this message board severely lacks.

 

[Britpilot]

I don't remember making a friend request so no big deal there.
I'm not on trial so I'm not going to bow to your demands, sorry fella.
Believe what you want to believe, make some phone calls champ, then put on one of your Kenny G CD's and find your happy place.