Captain X said:
The mediator overseeing our negotiations has nothing to do with getting a release.
The mediator is one of many government employees who do this for a living and they have limited power. They have to report to the three people (the board) appointed by the white house who hold the true authority.
Ultimately, the mediator is not the one who makes the decisions. The board does and replacing the mediator would have no effect on the outcome.
With all due respect, most of what you say above is ture, however it is NOT true that the mediator "has nothing to do with getting a release."
The Board members ARE the ones that make the final decision but they do not do so in a vacuum. They receive "recommendations" from the mediator and those recommendations are given a great deal of weight in the decision.
It is also true that, behind the scenes - not in public, the also receive recommendations from the national union. While not "official" you can bet your last dollar that if the union does not want you to get a release you will not get one.
In theory the union has no "influence" over the Board. In the real world it has more influence than probably anyone else. That influence will not get you a release if the Board is opposed. However, if the union is opposed there will be no release. BTW, the Board also gets recommendations from the Company.
The decisions of the Board are made behind closed doors. The "advice" that it gets, both from the mediator and especially from the union, is also behind closed doors. So is the advice from the company.
What you see (and hear) is not always what you get. Believe it or not these decisions are "political" and very little about politics is "straight".
Collective bargaining is a contest of wills just as much as a question of economics and politics. More often than not, the weakest link in the process is the employee grop, which always has difficulty in achieving consensus; too many opinions from too many people. In contrast the Company is totally united and so, in most cases, is the national union. If the pilot group is in possession of true solidarity it can win the contest of wills, but the odds are not in its favor.
As an example of what I'm trying to say I offer you this thread. I see a great deal of disagreement among the pilots and this is only a small sampling of the group. You aren't going to find a thread that shows disagreement between management. You aren't going to find visible disagreement from the national union. You are having "road shows" because the NC and your MEC agree and there is no public sign of in fighting.
I don't work for your airline so I can't get an accurate "read" on your group. However, I will go out on a limb and say: If your solidarity is indicated by this thread you're in trouble.
A lot of you are using my airline (Comair) as an example and I don't mean about the terms of our contract. Everyone knows we had a strike and how long it lasted. We voted down two "last and best" offers from the company and in both cases the NO votes were well over 90%, one before the strike and one during the strike. Our MEC and NC never recommended a "yes" vote and never had a TA until the 3rd "offer" came from the Company. long after the strike was in progress. There was never any question of solidarity going into the battle. And there was none before vote # 3. It took nearly 3 months of walking the picket before anyone could get a 60% + "yes" from the pilots or their leaders.
I'm not bragging at all, just stating the facts. The only time a "strike vote" really matters is after the strike begins.
Think about it.
