Petition

[bcflyer]

No update, ALPA is too busy watching the MEC getting recalled at WestJet and losing on every other front in Canada.

Time for the junior 1000 at AC to wake up. ALPA will not save you from the inept P4C.

Junior 1000?

I'd estimate that the bottom half of the list, ie.2100+ people, is better than 90% pro-ALPA.

I'd estimate of 2nd quartile is better than 2/3 pro-ALPA and the top quartile is maybe 60:40 one way or the other.

Average that out and you've got conservatively a 75% member yes vote for ALPA merger.

Ok so if your opinion is so accurate why did only half the pilots in YVR support the P4C candidates?

P4C nothing to do with the pilot groups desire to look into ALPA and you know it. Of the 3 candidates for YVR chair, only one was affiliated with P4C however ALL 3 of the candidates were open to seeing what ALPA has to say. Far more than 50% of the YVR pilots want to look into ALPA. Stop throwing all this misinformation around. You lost. The old guard, of which you are undoubtedly one, has been soundly defeated. Deal with it.

[Rather be]

I just have a tough time with math and in particular, division

Like how to divide by 3...if there are 3 candidates and one gets 50% of all the votes, that is a pretty big margin of victory.

I'm just not sharpest knife in the drawer sometimes. Sorry about that

[Fanblade]

Well if you actually talked to line pilots you'd realize that a lot, I'd say an overwhelming majority of those I work with want to see us go to ALPA before we spend another second sitting at the bargaining table with the company. And I fully agree.

You are a minority and you can't seem to accept it. Are you anti democracy? Seems like it.

Not at all! That’s why I would like to see the results of that survey question made public to us. It won’t affect negotiations just the timing of a union drive.

Ratherbe,

Any survey data you might be referring to would predate the latest MOA. Clearly either the previous survey misrepresented what the pilots were thinking, it was interpreted wrong, or that thinking has changed.

When any doubt arises the correct thing to do is engage the membership. Figure out exactly what they want. An 80% rejection says what you thought you knew, is wrong. It means stop and set the park brake. Reassessment is required.

I am only one person but I can tell you my attitude has changed. Last spring I was kind of on the fence if I wanted ACPA to keep negotiating while we looked into ALPA. But after the MOA? My attitude is PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not re engage the company. If that MOA had been during regular negotiations, where arbitration was a possibility, we could have had another TA1 repeat.

We were warned in our governance review that if we don’t change we could very likely repeat that whole experience. We can’t afford another set back like that.

In my eyes the recently failed MOA was a warning shot. The Master Caution went off and a stack of ECAM procedures popped up. I’ve gone from yeah I think we can push on, to, I think we should declare a Pan, divert and get on the ground ASAP.

[RippleRock]

Guys like Ratherbe are reeking of sour grapes. How about getting back to work on the line without griping?

Cry us a river about having to leave the cottage shuttered. Full displacement wasn't going to last forever.

If the newly elected candidates do NOTHING it will be better than any "contribution" you guys ever thought you made. The days of taking a "horse" into a horse trade, and coming back with a "lame donkey" are over, one way or the other.

[FL030]

What's happening with this now?

[Fanblade]

What's happening with this now?

I asked and was told to standby for latest ATIS message. That the latest MEC meeting provided direction and we should hear something on next steps early December.

[FL030]

Thanks for the update.

[Dry Guy]

There's a new email now saying "ACPA received a petition, which was validated by the VCC, where 30% of our membership requested to have more education on what ALPA membership would look like."

That's not what the petition said was it? I signed it with the intent to direct the MEC to hold a membership vote on a merger with ALPA. Not to have more education on what that would look like.

[BTD]

Then you signed a different petition.

The first step was ALPA education on merger and negotiation.

[Dry Guy]

"The goal of the ALPA Education and Membership Petition is:
To petition the MEC to conduct a vote of the national membership on the following
question: Do you support prompt education about ALPA membership and a merger
agreement negotiation, followed by a vote on a merger with ALPA?"

[Dash.Trash]

"The goal of the ALPA Education and Membership Petition is:
To petition the MEC to conduct a vote of the national membership on the following
question: Do you support prompt education about ALPA membership and a merger
agreement negotiation, followed by a vote on a merger with ALPA?"

Pretty sure you just answered your own question.

Step 1: education and merger negotiations.
Step 2: vote.

[Fanblade]

"The goal of the ALPA Education and Membership Petition is:
To petition the MEC to conduct a vote of the national membership on the following
question: Do you support prompt education about ALPA membership and a merger
agreement negotiation, followed by a vote on a merger with ALPA?"

The petition question was pretty loaded. The question is how to execute.

The survey with the petition question creates the mandate to negotiate, educate and then vote.

[Dry Guy]

You guys are right. I think I'm just anxious about how they are going to try to weasel out of putting the ALPA merger to a vote. I'll relax, for now.

[Dash.Trash]

The majority of the new MEC ran on a pretty clear pro-ALPA platform. I don’t think weaseling out of a vote is something they are interested in doing.

[Fanblade]

You guys are right. I think I'm just anxious about how they are going to try to weasel out of putting the ALPA merger to a vote. I'll relax, for now.

You have good reason to be anxious. The concern isn’t the MEC though. They have a majority and are laser focused on ALPA.

What we should be concerned about is the possibility of other elements attempting to seize or create an opportunity to stall or derail a switch to ALPA. I don’t mean just within our group either. The company does not want to deal with ALPA.

[RippleRock]

Pretty HUGE disappointment with the MEC's choice to support the continuation of the "Dumb and Dumber Show" as our Negots commitee reps. These two are duds --and they have proven so-- every time they enter the Negots arena.

We consistently lose the most at the negotiating table with their representation. So what does the MEC do? Keep them on. We learn nothing apparently. Absolutely nothing. Same old, same old.

ACPA the gift that keeps on giving.

[FL030]

I will continue to suggest the hiring of professional negotiaters in every survey opportunity I am given.

[Bede]

I will continue to suggest the hiring of professional negotiaters in every survey opportunity I am given.

May I ask why you think that you'd get better results with professional negotiators?

[TheAlcalde]

I will continue to suggest the hiring of professional negotiaters in every survey opportunity I am given.

May I ask why you think that you'd get better results with professional negotiators?

Operative word is professional

[Bede]

I will continue to suggest the hiring of professional negotiaters in every survey opportunity I am given.

May I ask why you think that you'd get better results with professional negotiators?

Operative word is professional

I know. I'm just curious if there's any examples of pilot groups doing better with "professional negotiators" leading as opposed to pilots leading and being advised by professional negotiators (which is how ALPA does it). After all, pilots have to fly the contract, not the negotiators.