SWA today like the airline in the book, "Nuts!"?

[HowardBorden]

You conveniently ignore the fact that none of this recall nonsense started right after the vote. It only came after Gary started making the public veiled threats. The pilots were fine with the MEC's vote (except for a tiny minority of pilots) until Gary made them piss their panties.

So you're telling me the same "MAJORITY" that was screaming don't put AIP1 out for a vote, was the "MAJORITY" that voted to recall the union representatives for not putting AIP1 out for a vote? You can obviously see how that seems completely counterintuitive right?

 

[PCL_128]

So you're telling me the same "MAJORITY" that was screaming don't put AIP1 out for a vote, was the "MAJORITY" that voted to recall the union representatives for not putting AIP1 out for a vote? You can obviously see how that seems completely counterintuitive right?

It only seems strange if you weren't here to see it. Pilots who were frothing at the mouth insisting that the MEC vote down AIP1 were, just a week later, frothing at the mouth demanding their recall for doing so. People flip-flopped faster than John McCain trying to win an election.

 

[HowardBorden]

It only seems strange if you weren't here to see it. Pilots who were frothing at the mouth insisting that the MEC vote down AIP1 were, just a week later, frothing at the mouth demanding their recall for doing so.

And you are so fond of claiming that SWAPA lacks integrity, unbelievable!

 

[maxblast72]

The cowardice of the membership didn't rear its ugly head until after GK sent out his mildly threatening letter the week after the MEC voted down the TA. Prior to that, the pilot group was at least 3-1, probably 4-1, opposed to the deal, and demanding that the MEC vote it down. The anger that the deal was even reached was palpable. But as soon as GK started throwing around some "scary" words, a lot of people got weak in the knees. A lot more than I ever would have expected, especially after a 98% strike vote just a year prior.

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

"Keep up the good work. Ninety percent of the pilots I speak with want to vote. How can I put more pressure on?"

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

"At least 80% of the folks I have heard from want to be able to vote."

Let me know if you need the document numbers. Your recollection of history would be a lot better if you read through more of the emails and documents produced by ALPA.

 

[Kenney G]

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

"Keep up the good work. Ninety percent of the pilots I speak with want to vote. How can I put more pressure on?"

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

"At least 80% of the folks I have heard from want to be able to vote."

Let me know if you need the document numbers. Your recollection of history would be a lot better if you read through more of the emails and documents produced by ALPA.

Didn't the MCO and MKE reps poll each one of their pilots in base to come up with their no vote?

Oh yeah, 76% of statistics are made up on the spot.

 

[maxblast72]

Didn't the MCO and MKE reps poll each one of their pilots in base to come up with their no vote?

Oh yeah, 76% of statistics are made up on the spot.

One MCO FO I flew with said his rep called him and asked "Do you want me to turn this POS down?"

I don't know if that qualifies as useful polling.

 

[maxblast72]

It only seems strange if you weren't here to see it. Pilots who were frothing at the mouth insisting that the MEC vote down AIP1 were, just a week later, frothing at the mouth demanding their recall for doing so. People flip-flopped faster than John McCain trying to win an election.

I believe most pilots demanded a recall because they thought the MEC had lied to pilot group prior to their August 18, 2011 vote on SIA #1. Here is an email from a line pilot to the MEC on September 5, 2011 (and this guy used to be one of the more radical guys on our forum):

​

"All,

As new information comes to light regarding AIP1, I become more and more disturbed, disgusted, saddened, angry, and mistrustful of any of you.

I'll start by admitting that I encouraged all of you to vote 'no' to AIP1. It seems that was a mistake. It now appears that I encouraged you to do something that I was, at best, only partially (mis?)informed about. I can certainly say that a lot of facts were missing that are now surfacing. Facts that may have changed my opinion (and that of many pilots) had I known them two weeks ago. I can not say whether this was something that any of you did intentionally. If so, I find that criminal. Withholding very critical, important information when asking us to make such an important decision is irresponsible and negligent. Why? With probably the most important career decision many of us would ever have to make. Why did you not tell us the whole story?

None of us yet knows how this will turn out, nor how the terms of AIP2 will look. But it is likely that the 'lying by omission' from the parties who knew (MEC, MC) will end up costing many of us many hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. How sad if it turns out this way.

In retrospect, it was my mistake to trust any of you to make full disclosure of what was truly at stake. I won't make the same mistake again. Whatever AIP2 contains, it MUST be voted on by the pilots. There must be full disclosure of all terms, conditions, and restrictions. There MUST be full disclosure of all risks, threats, perceptions of threats, and potential consequences. It must all be laid out clearly and plainly on the table, so that all of us can make the best decision for ourselves and our families, as it now seems none of you can be trusted to do so.

Start communicating, start leading, start earning back our trust.....before it's entirely too late...please......"

 

[PCL_128]

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

The same S/T who never showed up to meetings?

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

The same S/T who wasn't even allowed by the MEC to go to the Dallas meeting?

You aren't exactly using good sources, here. But that's typical of you.

 

[HowardBorden]

The same S/T who never showed up to meetings?



The same S/T who wasn't even allowed by the MEC to go to the Dallas meeting?

You aren't exactly using good sources, here.

You have to admit, he backs up his words with actual quotes from the people in question. Whether you like it or not, these seem to be actual quotes from actual ALPA officers. They may not be flattering, but I don't hear you disputing the quotes as accurate or their veracity as spoken by said ALPA officers.

 

[400ADude]

Nice attempt to rewrite history. Have you seen the email from the MCO LEC Secretary/Treasurer to the Merger Committee Vice Chair:

"Keep up the good work. Ninety percent of the pilots I speak with want to vote. How can I put more pressure on?"

Or the email from the MEC Secretary/Treasurer to the MEC:

"At least 80% of the folks I have heard from want to be able to vote."

Let me know if you need the document numbers. Your recollection of history would be a lot better if you read through more of the emails and documents produced by ALPA.

Very interesting indeed.

 

[PCL_128]

You have to admit, he backs up his words with actual quotes from the people in question. Whether you like it or not, these seem to be actual quotes from actual ALPA officers. They may not be flattering, but I don't hear you disputing the quotes as accurate or their veracity as spoken by said ALPA officers.

Quoting private emails is inappropriate. He should know better, but he's practically a sociopath, so it's not surprising that he doesn't.

What I dispute is that the people he quotes would have any idea. They were detached from the process, and the pilots don't communicate with the non-voting officials, by and large. The people inundated with hundreds upon hundreds of emails were the voting reps. And since they voted 7-1 against the deal, I think it's pretty clear what those hundreds of emails directed the reps to do. And anyone present at the meeting that day, where several hundred pilots showed up to speak, would know that the opinion in the room was at least 3-1 opposed to sending the deal out for a vote. That's not just based upon the people who spoke. There was actually a show of hands. It was overwhelmingly opposed to the deal going out. But maxblast conveniently "forgets" that.

 

[madjack]

Informal polling and a show of hands in a room full of pilots seems like pretty shoddy union work....hopefully u will be better prepared for the DRC Arby...good luck...

 

[HowardBorden]

Quoting private emails is inappropriate. He should know better, but he's practically a sociopath, so it's not surprising that he doesn't.

What I dispute is that the people he quotes would have any idea. They were detached from the process, and the pilots don't communicate with the non-voting officials, by and large. The people inundated with hundreds upon hundreds of emails were the voting reps. And since they voted 7-1 against the deal, I think it's pretty clear what those hundreds of emails directed the reps to do.

Quoting private e-mails may be inappropriate, but you do understand these quotes have been made part of the public record when they were entered as evidence in a lawsuit, correct?

"The people inundated with hundreds upon hundreds of emails were the voting reps. And since they voted 7-1 against the deal, I think it's pretty clear what those hundreds of emails directed the reps to do." It would seem that the hundreds upon hundreds of constituents that voted to remove the very representatives that made that decision from office would disagree with that statement.

 

[canyonblue]

Now they start getting everyone else, and they'll see just how their piss-poor employee relations towards us really affected things.

I just can't wait to see it! On the other hand, I believe we will see nothing, since past practice hasn't shown any results.

 

[PCL_128]

Quoting private e-mails may be inappropriate, but you do understand these quotes have been made part of the public record when they were entered as evidence in a lawsuit, correct?

The lawsuit is still in the discovery phase, and no public docket is available. Furthermore, I don't know if these emails have even been submitted as exhibits in the depositions. It's likely that they're just emails that maxblast has. Something submitted in discovery by the defendant but not submitted as evidence by the plaintiffs is not part of the public record.

It would seem that the hundreds upon hundreds of constituents that voted to remove the very representatives that made that decision from office would disagree with that statement.

Since the emails are all stored on the ALPA server, they can disagree all they want, but facts are facts. If the lawsuit does go to trial (unlikely), you'll see just how many of these people flip-flopped.