MaxBlast feeling the LUV!

[K-Mart]

I understand your frustration.

 

[madjack]

Don,

The last guy I flew with was a FAT CP (717 and 737), he was not happy about the loss of seniority and pay...but he did wish he had a vote on the first agreement. As a matter of fact every FAT I have flown with, wishes the membership had gotten a vote.

One in 3 SWA pilots will be FAT...that is big number...I will say that the situation is awkward, but every FAT pilot has been a pleasure to fly with and are all great folks...they have been real pros...

I'm not sure how I would feel if I were a FAT pilot, now at SWA with less seniority than I once had at AAI..but WE all will feel better if the company prospers and manages to start growing again...

I think the FAT pilots are a good fit for our group, great pilots with fun-loving attitudes...

GK hooked up his homies (and that is very debatable at certain seniority cross sections on our list), but what did you really expect him to do??? I mean really, he held all the cards...

 

[DonVerita]

I attended one of his infamous "pizza parties" and he presented factual data. There were plenty in attendance, myself included, that were not happy with certain aspects of the deal. I don't remember him blowing any smoke up anyones rear to try and convince them that it was a terrific deal. He made it clear that certain statements had been made by GK that presented some level of risk.

But it really shows a lack of situational awareness to shoulder Max with any more or less of the blame than every other member of the MC, the MEC, and by extension the members of this union.

Parethd...

Nobody is shouldering him with more or less of the blame. He has made himself into a lightening rod because he gets on here and can't stop himself from posting. It has been implied that this is why the ATN internal forum was shut down; at least until after the DRC case is arbitrated in October.

As you probably know, when a person is a member of a committee, including the MC, they do so at the liberty of, and receiving direction from, the MEC. Strict obedience to the governing body (the MEC) is a given and it is an unwavering requirement. Those "pizza parties" he was hosting, one of which you attended, were not sanctioned by the MEC. The information that he was spilling, was not authorized for distribution because said information was fluid. IOW, what seems to be cast in stone today, usually changes into something else tomorrow. Only at the end of the process, when signatures are put onto paper, do we have a final result. Only at that time does an MEC authorize release of negotiated agreements. Such a release is handled via controlled environments such as Road Shows.

Max's first mistake, after being part of a group of four MC members that delivered an absolutely piss poor product to the MEC (subsequently triggering an MEC rejection of that product) was that he went rogue. He had zero authority to speak to the rank and file outside of approved communications. The MEC approves communications to the pilot group after vetting it with the lawyers; only then does it get dispersed via avenues such as their Communication Committee or sometimes by a Committee Chairman, but only after being sanctioned to do so. Max is not and was not the MC Chairman.

Max is so far out in left field that he is in the parking lot. He is trying to rationalize and engage in revisionist history for his and the MC's failure; and the folks around here have had enough. He'll be going through the partition in November. I have no doubt that his ranting will continue over there too.

 

[DonVerita]

GK hooked up his homies (and that is very debatable at certain seniority cross sections on our list), but what did you really expect him to do??? I mean really, he held all the cards...

One side holds all the cards only if the other side thinks he does.

What did I expect him to do? I expected him to follow the Process Agreement that was agreed to and signed by all parties.

As for voting...The membership did not get a vote because the MC did not deliver a product to the MEC that was worthy of a vote. What they delivered was garbage and because of that the entire MC should have been recalled and replaced before going into the next round.

 

[Tripower455]

One side holds all the cards only if the other side thinks he does.

What did I expect him to do? I expected him to follow the Process Agreement that was agreed to and signed by all parties.

Well, he did that. He got a negotiated agreement that was agreed to, nearly unanimously, by all parties involved.

As for voting...The membership did not get a vote because the MC did not deliver a product to the MEC that was worthy of a vote. What they delivered was garbage and because of that the entire MC should have been recalled and replaced before going into the next round.

And yet, every FAT guy I've flown or discussed this issue with wish they'd had the opportunity to vote on the first offer.

 

[j41driver]

I have no doubt that his ranting will continue over there too.

That ain't gonna work out so well for Max...

 

[madjack]

DV,

I really do get it, but that does not matter, Kelly did what he thought was best for the company, you dont have to agree...ask him next time u see him why he got involved in the process... To me answer is pretty obvious...

 

[Britpilot]

But since I don't see you or other SWA pilots admitting that it's wrong for your employer to require newhire pilots to buy a type rating, you don't exactly have a lot of credibility in complaining about PFT. Granted, it's not quite the same thing, but it is related.

SWA does not require you to BUY a 737 Type Rating. They require you to HAVE one for employment.
So you're wrong again Tubby.

 

[SplitBar]

Does having the type rating save SWA money on training new hires? Couldn't they just as easily train a new hire without the type? Seems like it would be the same training course regardless of typed or not when showing up as a new hire.

 

[HowardBorden]

What did I expect him to do? I expected him to follow the Process Agreement that was agreed to and signed by all parties.

I see this statement over and over and over again. Please cite actual wording from the document and present your case as to which portion was not followed. I want to see the actual language you feel was not followed.