A320 Driver
Veteran
- Aug 24, 2002
- 3,358
- 2,319
Enjoy the fallout rusthead.luvthe9 said:
Nov/Dec 2013 Pilot Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
Freighterguynow
Veteran
- Jan 5, 2004
- 1,276
- 1,207
Some retired guy who once rode a jumpseat almost 20 years ago.snapthis said:
Really?
Res Judicata
Veteran
Do any of the authors of the "don't recall" letters have a high school diploma? Their illiteracy should be embarrassing enough to hire a proofreader.
luvthe9
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 9,464
- 14,119
[SIZE=24pt]GOOD LETTER[/SIZE][SIZE=24pt].............DDR’s and why Reps use them[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]It was only a matter of time. Apparently Team Hummel is running out of things to smear people with, and now the topic is the use of DDR’s, or Duly Designated Representatives. I find it beyond hilarious that [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]Joe Voter – who is really Mark King, and who is inexplicably being allowed to use union resources to email his rhetoric to the entire USAPA membership [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]– is calling me cowardly, when he doesn’t have the integrity to write to you without hiding behind his “Joe Voter” screen name. In any case, I’m Mike Gillies, and I hope you’ll consider the following information.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]BPR members utilize DDRs for various reasons, sometimes to cover an absence caused by things outside their control – like a family emergency or a training event – and sometimes Reps utilize DDRs in a deliberate effort to place someone in the Boardroom who will provide you with better representation on a particular issue. The West Reps have famously utilized DDRs for many reasons, I’m sure, but I’d suspect it’s their desire to place certain people at the BPR meetings that most often drives them; in fact, I can scarcely remember a BPR meeting when one or more of their positions weren’t covered by a DDR.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]In the case of the BPR meeting when MOU II was finally voted in, I appointed Paul DiOrio as my DDR for two reasons: One, I was attending a training event, and Two, I wanted Paul there to have a look at the final product before he and I collectively – in a closely coordinated effort – placed my vote on the MOU. We did this together, and one result of our teamwork is the Retro Pay you’ll be receiving on 12/30/13. According to Joe Voter, this was cowardly on my part, and I’ll tell you now, I’d do it again! Far from cowardly, it was one of the most effective moves we made in the final stage of MOU negotiations.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Those who actually know me will tell you, I never let my ego get in the way of my flying or my union work. The only reason I can imagine for not calling on Paul DiOrio as an extra set of eyes on MOU II would be some sick need to sit there and make all the decisions by myself. I had already attended numerous meetings concerning the MOU, as well as Closed Session meetings with Management and Unsecured Creditor Committee attorney, Jack Butler. Why wouldn’t I want DiOrio – who has an entire room in his home dedicated to storing data from years of negotiating with US Airways – to be there as an extra set of eyes??? In my book -- and in the eyes of hundreds of pilots I spoke with that week and in the months that followed -- utilizing Paul as my DDR on that particular occasion was a good move, both politically and from a representational standpoint.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]In today’s electronic world, no one is ever really “absent” like Joe Voter wants to portray it. His effort to distract you, by taking issue with who was physically sitting at the table, is just another indicator of how desperate Team Hummel is. Utilizing DiOrio as a DDR was an intentional move that was driven by my desire to make sure that we had “all hands on deck.” Furthermore, this wouldn’t have been necessary if Gary Hummel hadn’t succumbed to pressure from US Airways management by removing DiOrio from the NAC because they told him it was the only way they’d “give us a deal” – a fact that was verified by our Professional Negotiator, Roland Wilder. Appointing DiOrio as DDR was my way of placing him back into the mix, in a position to help make a decision. I’m certain it caught Hummel and his friends in Tempe off guard, and it was clearly very effective in the final stretch. In short, it was a smart, selfless move on my part, and like I said: I’d do it again![/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Enjoy your Retro Pay, and know that Paul DiOrio and I worked together with Chairman Steve Szpyrka in conjunction with the former CLT Reps to make it happen. It’s called “union work,” and it’s no surprise to me that Joe Voter doesn’t get it. The guy he’s trying to protect – Gary Hummel – likes to work solo.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Please VOTE YES to recall these unscrupulous “leaders.”[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]https://www.BallotPoint.com/USAPA[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]It was only a matter of time. Apparently Team Hummel is running out of things to smear people with, and now the topic is the use of DDR’s, or Duly Designated Representatives. I find it beyond hilarious that [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]Joe Voter – who is really Mark King, and who is inexplicably being allowed to use union resources to email his rhetoric to the entire USAPA membership [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]– is calling me cowardly, when he doesn’t have the integrity to write to you without hiding behind his “Joe Voter” screen name. In any case, I’m Mike Gillies, and I hope you’ll consider the following information.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]BPR members utilize DDRs for various reasons, sometimes to cover an absence caused by things outside their control – like a family emergency or a training event – and sometimes Reps utilize DDRs in a deliberate effort to place someone in the Boardroom who will provide you with better representation on a particular issue. The West Reps have famously utilized DDRs for many reasons, I’m sure, but I’d suspect it’s their desire to place certain people at the BPR meetings that most often drives them; in fact, I can scarcely remember a BPR meeting when one or more of their positions weren’t covered by a DDR.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]In the case of the BPR meeting when MOU II was finally voted in, I appointed Paul DiOrio as my DDR for two reasons: One, I was attending a training event, and Two, I wanted Paul there to have a look at the final product before he and I collectively – in a closely coordinated effort – placed my vote on the MOU. We did this together, and one result of our teamwork is the Retro Pay you’ll be receiving on 12/30/13. According to Joe Voter, this was cowardly on my part, and I’ll tell you now, I’d do it again! Far from cowardly, it was one of the most effective moves we made in the final stage of MOU negotiations.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Those who actually know me will tell you, I never let my ego get in the way of my flying or my union work. The only reason I can imagine for not calling on Paul DiOrio as an extra set of eyes on MOU II would be some sick need to sit there and make all the decisions by myself. I had already attended numerous meetings concerning the MOU, as well as Closed Session meetings with Management and Unsecured Creditor Committee attorney, Jack Butler. Why wouldn’t I want DiOrio – who has an entire room in his home dedicated to storing data from years of negotiating with US Airways – to be there as an extra set of eyes??? In my book -- and in the eyes of hundreds of pilots I spoke with that week and in the months that followed -- utilizing Paul as my DDR on that particular occasion was a good move, both politically and from a representational standpoint.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]In today’s electronic world, no one is ever really “absent” like Joe Voter wants to portray it. His effort to distract you, by taking issue with who was physically sitting at the table, is just another indicator of how desperate Team Hummel is. Utilizing DiOrio as a DDR was an intentional move that was driven by my desire to make sure that we had “all hands on deck.” Furthermore, this wouldn’t have been necessary if Gary Hummel hadn’t succumbed to pressure from US Airways management by removing DiOrio from the NAC because they told him it was the only way they’d “give us a deal” – a fact that was verified by our Professional Negotiator, Roland Wilder. Appointing DiOrio as DDR was my way of placing him back into the mix, in a position to help make a decision. I’m certain it caught Hummel and his friends in Tempe off guard, and it was clearly very effective in the final stretch. In short, it was a smart, selfless move on my part, and like I said: I’d do it again![/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Enjoy your Retro Pay, and know that Paul DiOrio and I worked together with Chairman Steve Szpyrka in conjunction with the former CLT Reps to make it happen. It’s called “union work,” and it’s no surprise to me that Joe Voter doesn’t get it. The guy he’s trying to protect – Gary Hummel – likes to work solo.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Please VOTE YES to recall these unscrupulous “leaders.”[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]https://www.BallotPoint.com/USAPA[/SIZE]
PullUp
Veteran
- May 22, 2010
- 820
- 736
Yep, only took 9 days for mgmt. to welch on the deal. I fault our NAC and the BPR: haven't we learned to get it all in black and white with this mgmt?luvthe9 said:
That was one of the big problems with ALPO - having vague contract language that the company could 'interpret' any way they wanted.
Sorry, I have to agree with the westies on this one. BUT I disagree with their bitching and moaning when they overwhelmingly voted FOR it.
So when does APA take over?
traderjake
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 5,669
- 9,308
luvthe9 said:
Poor luvthe9 thinks we'd be better off going into the seniority integration on still on LOA 93.
The world is such a confusing place for him.
A320 Driver
Veteran
- Aug 24, 2002
- 3,358
- 2,319
That's right, blame it on the pilot group. Give Freshwater, Brookman (DiOrio's partner) and Mowery a pass. Never mind the fact that they passed on the better deal and didn't give us a vote on it instead of listening to our advisors. Wait until we're backed into a freaking corner and then BLAME US!!! You, Brookman and DiOrio...cut from the same cloth. It's amazing we made it this far. APA can't take over soon enough for me and render you and your buddies irrelevant.luvthe9 said:
PullUp
Veteran
- May 22, 2010
- 820
- 736
No. The product that was voted on was substandard. AND again we had the metaphorical 'gun pointed at our head'.luvthe9 said:
The member voting is, was, and ever will be a sham because it is so easy to manipulate the group, especially when the board "had to unanimously support it" to appease the UCC.
Right. The pay was trumpeted and the rest was glossed over.
Y'all saw the money and nothing else.
The devil is always in the details...and as detailed oriented professionals, why didn't our esteemed union people 'get it in writing'?
Res Judicata
Veteran
It was the best the APA Could get you. You know beyond a shadow of a doubt that without this merger you'd be on LOA93 until you retired. You KNOW that. Be happy that despite itself, USCABA didn't Fk up the only chance you'd have at a raise in a decade. Oh they tried to Fk it up, but luckily the West delivered the votes for you and blocked them.PullUp said:
- Status
