Possible SWA T.A. pay numbers... Embrace the suck.

[Phlintstone]

I got a blast email. You didn't?

So did I.

Attacking without facts on an www forum. IM SHOCKED!

Phred

 

[PCL_128]

I have officially requested, per the RLA and in conjunction with the Association's Duty of Fair Representation for them to buy out and allow two "No" representatives to accompany every road show and be given equal time to present what is considered the negatives and pitfalls of the Agreement and the loopholes in the language.

Eh, just so you know, they have no requirement under the RLA or DFR doctrine to allow that. I'd be shocked if they agree.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

My rep told me all of the reps will be at the road shows anyway.

 

[N1atEcon]

I had low expectations since the snake Randy Babbit got in our hen house. Then the rumors started leaking and I lowered my expectations again. But this, WOW! I didn't imagine it would be this pathectic. I seriously think they think we are idiots. I don't need the Union to spend a bunch of my dues. Its a NO!
Also if there is a recall of PJ and TW I will sign that ASAP.

 

[Just thinking]

Nothing yesterday. Only thing I got was from 16th. Got email from DAL reps today.

 

[madjack]

I predict it will pass....barely

 

[madjack]

Or fail...barely

 

[PCL_128]

My rep told me all of the reps will be at the road shows anyway.

Being there is one thing. Being able to make a presentation is another. All reps could attend our TA road shows, but I certainly didn't allow the dissenting votes to make their own ant-TA presentation when the vote of the MEC was in favor.

 

[Lear70]

Eh, just so you know, they have no requirement under the RLA or DFR doctrine to allow that. I'd be shocked if they agree.

They didn't, and they were pretty rude about it, said "there is no mechanism to allow people besides the NC and staffers to be trip pulled and attend, much less present."

I responded asking if, perhaps, they could use the SAME mechanism they did by creating the Neg Oversight Committee then pulling line pilot Tom Dean to be on it with pay. Maybe since they've already set the precedent...

I didn't get a nice response from Mike P, I'll be posting his exact response on the forum later.

I'm not interested in a sales job and spin. As "Just Thinking" mentioned, they're avoiding all the hard questions and just answering the ones they have good answers for that help sell it. (and he probably just didn't have his email address right in his SWAPA profile, there's a lot of people that happened to, doesn't make him a liar).

Back to the issue: No one should be surprised. No negotiating committee in the history of aviation has ever been able to neutrally discuss both the good AND bad of an Agreement; they're too personally invested.

As an interesting aside, there WAS a resolution to attach a "No" vote recommendation, BUT... it never got seconded. It took a lot of arm twisting to finally get them to admit that.

So we have 10 or the 20 reps voting Yes, with most of the reps SAYING they want the pilot group to kill it, but only ONE rep with the balls to try to send it out with a NO recommendation. Trying to find out who it was, everyone has pretty much clammed up once I let them know we would be working to kill it, just like we did at AAI in '07, except instead of just me starting the effort, there's a dozen of us and growing.

Standby for the Section 1 analysis, working on it now. It's an easy 5 year stagnation on growth. Maybe more. I'd like a raise as much as the next person, but not at this price. Hell, a 1 year delay on your upgrade wipes out your raise COMPLETELY.

Oh, and P.S. Hope you like red-eyes, which result in drastically less-efficient lines for only a 3% override instead of the 15% that's currently in our contract. Oh, and you can't trade out of them except for another red-eye. Lots and lots of stuff in this one to hate.

 

[HowardBorden]

Being there is one thing. Being able to make a presentation is another. All reps could attend our TA road shows, but I certainly didn't allow the dissenting votes to make their own ant-TA presentation when the vote of the MEC was in favor.

What a magnanimous dictator you were.

All members in good standing have a right to voice any opinion positive or negative at any road show. I expect my reps who have been fully briefed on this TA to voice any and all opinions regarding the agreement whether they be for or against ratification. Holding an elected office in no way muzzles a member as to their opinions regarding this TA.

 

[RIDETHELIGHTING]

The Denver reps voted against it!!!!

 

[PCL_128]

What a magnanimous dictator you were.

Thank you!

All members in good standing have a right to voice any opinion positive or negative at any road show. I expect my reps who have been fully briefed on this TA to voice any and all opinions regarding the agreement whether they be for or against ratification. Holding an elected office in no way muzzles a member as to their opinions regarding this TA.

Again, being able to stand up and ask a question or make a statement is not what Lear was talking about. He wants a full presentation of both pros and cons. They ain't gonna do that. I'd put money on it.

 

[HowardBorden]

Again, being able to stand up and ask a question or make a statement is not what Lear was talking about. He wants a full presentation of both pros and cons. They ain't gonna do that. I'd put money on it.

You better believe I will be asking each and every rep present at any road show I attend what their recommendation is for the membership vote. These folks have had extensive briefings and I want to know where they stand on the issue. They owe me an honest and forthright answer. Each and every board member needs to be on record as to their personal recommendation. Me personally I needed to read no further than section 1 give aways to know I was firm and unchangeable no. But, I need to know what reps share my sentiments and those that don't so I know who to vote for or against in being my elected representative going forward.

 

[PCL_128]

A shame that I resigned. This show could be entertaining.

I agree, BTW. I'm usually not a scope hawk, but it appears that the concessions in your TA would allow at least a couple years of stagnation as the company builds near international feed with code share partners. Bad juju. Unlike RJ feed, that's flying that the airline is likely to do itself if you don't give them the concessions. That is a direct giveaway of jobs.

 

[General Lee]

Thank you!






Again, being able to stand up and ask a question or make a statement is not what Lear was talking about. He wants a full presentation of both pros and cons. They ain't gonna do that. I'd put money on it.

Wait, didn't you say the DL TA was going to pass too? You're an idiot! Are you still applying to be a janitor at The Moak Group?




Bye Bye---General Lee