| | | Inside this issue: | The Joining of Three MEC's Final
* Combining Dual Councils
* Other Topics
|
Aloha Friends and Greetings from Oahu,
Thanks for staying with us in this third and final installment of reports from the Special MEC Meeting. Clearly, from your responses both electronically and in person, you remain engaged, interested and aware of all of the changes afoot.
Combining Dual Councils
Part of the process of merging three MEC’s, requires merging any dual councils. These dual councils will begin their elections in the next couple of months to select one set of LEC Officers vs the two existing ones.
The language of the C & B Merger Policy regarding dual local councils numbers is that the council number “shall be that of the lowest rank of the former Councils at the domicile.”
Dual Base Council #'s - Snapshot of Discussion on the Floor
- A motion was made for UAL-IAH 42 to become number 64, which is the current CAL-IAH council number, to respect that Council 64 was created first.
- A substitute motion was made to change all council numbers at the dual councils of EWR, SFO, LAX, IAH, IAD, DEN & ORD.
- Clarification was asked for. “Are these brand new numbers or a combination of new numbers?”
Sara answers that technically 3 numbers are the max that can be used. They would also need to petition the BOD to make this change to Policy.
A vote was taken for the substitute motion; to change all dual council #'s. The substitute motion fails.
The discussion went back to the original motion of IAH. LECPs and locations will be used for this portion in order to understand the BOS reference.
- Dagnall (EWR-UAL): Proposed a motion to create new #’s at every council.
- Wheeling (IAH-CAL): If we are the “new United,” and we are the MEC, let’s change them all.
- Kyle (DEN-UAL): Procedurally, who would assign those #’s?
- Fahy (BOS-UAL): Spoke against the motion and mentioned the recorded history of BOS as it related to Sept. 11.
You'll remember, Flight 175 (flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center) was a BOS based crew. This small base is family, much like our own and the pain of losing their fellow base members and close friends is relived with each anniversary.
The human side of these numbers grew in many minds.
The discussion on the floor continued.
- The issue of associated costs was brought up. One LECP cited that in branding alone, it would cost his council between $10,000 to $15,000 dollars of his councils budget to change bag tags, letterhead, etc.
- A member spoke from the visitors gallery: Member’s give a rip about what # they are. They just want to fly their trip, make some money and go home. Leave the numbers alone, follow the Policy and let’s move on.
Discussion stopped. Heads nodded. Shoulders shrugged. Sideway glances. Vote taken. Motion fails. Merger Policy will stand. Dual council numbers will be the lower number. The meeting continued to other topics as a Joint MEC.
Other Meeting Topics
Ken Diaz, the newly elected President of the merged MEC, then began to conduct the meeting. Other topics of business are attended to.
GUM
For our friends in GUM, pay attention to this. Ken stated that in a letter to Doug McKeen, United’s Senior VP of Labor Relations, that United should keep their word to make the GUM base Flight Attendants whole by fully recognizing them as United Flight Attendants. The timetable is now.
We will speak more on the GUM topic at a later date to explain this more fully. Kathleen Domondon, the LECP of GUM, has agreed to sit down when time permits, to elaborate.
Galley Pay and Contract Implementation Information
The JIT (Joint Contract Implementation Team) consists of Jack Kande, Kevin Lum and Denny Wheeling. They had a three hour meeting as to how to proceed. As you know, contractual items were placed in three categories. Some were effective immediately (DOS) day of signing, DOS + (Day of Signing plus Joint implementation), and others that would have to wait until CMS (the new crew management system) is developed to fully integrate the three groups and fleet.
Jack Kande was on hand and spoke of Galley Pay as it has been something that many of the LECP’s have been asking about for their members. Jack said that the MEC would have to give direction. Do they want to make it a position bid option for now?
His thoughts were that they could assign it a bid letter, much like the F, B, C, D position of old. Currently the bid system can differentiate the “F” on all aircraft for pay purposes, likewise the “B” position on the 747 and the “C” position on the 767-300 as a galley bid. But they would have to give the JIT direction to take it further with the Company.
White AFA Pins
Discussion was brought forth about the current AFA pin. We have a contract now, should we go back to the original white one and use the red one when we or another carrier is in contract negotiations?
A blue one was discussed as being a whole new identity but still AFA. A completely new pin to be designed was brought up. In the end a motion was proposed to go back to the original white pin. Motion passed. The current supply is limited and each base was allotted one pin per population until more pins could be obtained.
Also given were new AFA Sept. 11 pins. They are silver with a black ribbon emblem and AFA in the center. Both pins are available to you thru Kevin, Lani or Ilse, for the time being. So, the official pin is the white AFA pin. The red is fine until you get one if you don’t have your original. Consider it part of your uniform and wear it for what has and will be achieved in your interest.
Next MEC Meeting
The United MEC will return to their pre-scheduled calendar of quarterly MEC meetings. These meetings contain the annual reports of slated MEC Committees as well as MEC Officer reports and overall MEC discussion on actions going forward.
This 3-day meeting will occur on Sept. 20-23 in Chicago. All members are welcome to attend. Both Kevin and Lani will be in attendance. If you have any concerns or questions you would like to see addressed at the meeting, please feel free to contact them.
| 