This question has been asked and petitions sent to the District 142. But what was stated by the local union rep. was that Roach and the International stepped back and the final decision was in the hands of the District and PDGC Mr. Tom Higginbotham. He made the decision . As it was stated was that it is in the East contract and not the West contract that any IAM represented member would get the Profit Sharing. As you can see much latitude was taken on the part of Mr. Higginbotham. There are many ideas why he did this and many of the AGCs and Local Presidents disagreed with this decision along with the membership in the East . No one in the East disagrees with the West getting Profit Sharing but it should come out of Usairways profit and not out the East Profit Sharing amount. I am using this format because usig the regular channels and talking to Mr. Higginbotham went on deaf ears. I am now stating that we have enpowered the District and Mr. Higginbotham to do what they want and not listen to the membership as a Union is to do. As was stated that the District and the IAM International was looking how to stop Class Action Lawsuits; knowing that the West was going to sue but they felt that the East would not because it would tieup their Profit Sharing money. The bottom line is the Union that represents you are to listen to what you have to say and not dictate what they are going to do. The Union did not listen to the voice of the majority but to the voice of the Company . :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: