Pinnacle gets TA

[WildBlue]

That last part....I had not thought about that. Dictatorships are run that way. Publically execute anyone who gets in the way or has a contrary opinion. This generation grew up with political discourse as demonstrated by Hannity, O'Reilly, etc. Shout down anyone who disagrees. This is not McNeil/Lehrer.

It was just a matter of time before the MEC finally went dysfunctional. And none of the new kids on the block want to get involved, work together and pull the ox out of the ditch. Just sad.

 

[JustaNumber]

In addition, 99% of the pilot group had nothing to do with the TA...

Maybe I got spoiled with the way the contract was negotiated at ASA, but here's how it worked for us and I assumed it worked with every contract negotiation:

1. Negotiating committee CONSTANTLY polled pilot group to gauge what the pilot group wanted, and what the minimum they would settle for was, on every single contract issue.
2. Negotiating committee used polling data in determining what to aim for, and how low to go on each item.
3. Negotiating committee was reasonably certain that their final TA met the requirements of the pilot group, and would be ratified, otherwise they would not have agreed to the provisions. That's why it took 5 years.

So it truly is a representational contract, negotiated on behalf of the entire pilot group's desires and beliefs. To say that 99% of the pilot group had nothing to do with the TA is either incorrect, or your pilot group needs to replace your entire representational structure. It is YOUR contract, not the negotiating committee's contract.

 

[Smarta$$]

From what I heard the DTW FO rep and MSP FO rep did the motion. I also heard that one of the reps (I think the ATL FO) said that WG talked to them like they were children so he voted to recall. (Heard that from one of the CA reps.)

Bottom line, WG has been out of the top job for two years. This is SE's MEC, and if they didn't like what the NC was doing, they had years to fix it. WG is a sacrifice to the 300 hour JetU constituency. For him, it is a blessing....I'm not sure about the rest of us. He did a lot of good work and will be missed.

Can you explain what you mean by this? I am not JETU or a 300 hour wonder and will not defend them. Ever. Just wonder what you mean exactly.

 

[Smarta$$]

Maybe I got spoiled with the way the contract was negotiated at ASA, but here's how it worked for us and I assumed it worked with every contract negotiation:

1. Negotiating committee CONSTANTLY polled pilot group to gauge what the pilot group wanted, and what the minimum they would settle for was, on every single contract issue.
2. Negotiating committee used polling data in determining what to aim for, and how low to go on each item.
3. Negotiating committee was reasonably certain that their final TA met the requirements of the pilot group, and would be ratified, otherwise they would not have agreed to the provisions. That's why it took 5 years.

So it truly is a representational contract, negotiated on behalf of the entire pilot group's desires and beliefs. To say that 99% of the pilot group had nothing to do with the TA is either incorrect, or your pilot group needs to replace your entire representational structure. It is YOUR contract, not the negotiating committee's contract.

Carefull with your assumptions there. We were polled constantly. We told them what we wanted and what we expected. We as pilots were NOT aiming low.

Here is the problem, the TA seems to not represent, at all, in any way what we told the pollsters.

The question is why. I have my suspitions, which were formed from information from some within the MEC.

Sad state for us. We are not in a good position at all. And I think we were sold out from a few of the old guard from within.

Your right, we were polled. But did the negotiating commitee follow what we said we needed. Plus, I am not going to lie, we do have some serious pussies here.

 

[dondk]

Maybe I got spoiled with the way the contract was negotiated at ASA, but here's how it worked for us and I assumed it worked with every contract negotiation:

1. Negotiating committee CONSTANTLY polled pilot group to gauge what the pilot group wanted, and what the minimum they would settle for was, on every single contract issue.
2. Negotiating committee used polling data in determining what to aim for, and how low to go on each item.
3. Negotiating committee was reasonably certain that their final TA met the requirements of the pilot group, and would be ratified, otherwise they would not have agreed to the provisions. That's why it took 5 years.

So it truly is a representational contract, negotiated on behalf of the entire pilot group's desires and beliefs. To say that 99% of the pilot group had nothing to do with the TA is either incorrect, or your pilot group needs to replace your entire representational structure. It is YOUR contract, not the negotiating committee's contract.

There is being polled and then there really being polled for what the pilots wanted. We were polled with the same damn questions. What do you think of your pay? would you say, very underpaid, somewhat underpaid, adequately underpaid, not underpaid enough, or overpaid? Why was that question even asked? Or my favorite, is the MEC doing a good job, could be better, could be worse or piss poor job? Why we were polled about our feelings regarding the MEC was another dumba$$ question.

I don't know why we were polled so much, if the MEC and NC committee was clueless to the needs of the pilots they were the wrong people to start with. Ideally, since they were/are line pilots they should have known what the pilot group NEEDED, then polled for what the pilot group wanted. Would a pilot give up a day off to get health bennies? Would a pilot give up hotel quality for block or better? Te pilots were not polled on if they thought getting rid of moving days was desired, they were not polled if 1.60 per diem was too little, sadly those issues were left out.

Did they read the results of the polls? I know the MEC did, I am sure the NC saw some of the results. The issue is the MEC directed the NC, not the pilot group. As Smarta$$ states, you may assume that some of the MEC interpreted the polls there own way and directed the NC accordingly. Heck, they wrote the polling questions, it should be no surprise that the polls may not match the actual desires of pilots.

I don't know if anyone was sold out by the old guard. It takes a majority to approve a section of the TA. When and IF the TA is released, the questions at the road shows to the elected reps should be what did you vote on this section and why. If the NC shows up, the questions to them should be what direction were you given on this section.

If it happens and someone did it, that would be priceless, although as Smarta$$, there are some serious pussies that are too afraid to stand up.

 

[PCL_128]

The issue is the MEC directed the NC, not the pilot group.

Actually, I would argue that the real problem was that NO ONE was directing the NC. The MEC is supposed to be the ones directing them, not the pilot group. The pilot group directs the MEC, and the MEC directs every committee. Unfortunately, I think there has been a problem on the PCL MEC for a long time that too many MEC members are apathetic and not keeping a close enough eye on what's going on with their own committees.

 

[dondk]

Unfortunately, I think there has been a problem on the PCL MEC for a long time that too many MEC members are apathetic and not keeping a close enough eye on what's going on with their own committees.

Sadly, I agree. They wonder why no one wants to volunteer.

 

[JoeMerchant]

This is the direct result of creating a whole level of flying that is simply a "stepping stone"....Nobody really cares because they are leaving in a few years for greener pastures.....We created this mess once again....

 

[PCL_128]

This is the direct result of creating a whole level of flying that is simply a "stepping stone"....Nobody really cares because they are leaving in a few years for greener pastures.....We created this mess once again....

No disagreement.

 

[JoeMerchant]

No disagreement.

.....then why do you promote it?