Originally Posted by B A Lert
Datum,
Can anyone tell us with a straight face and hand on heart exactly why the president of a wealthy trade union and his side-kick should have their salaries paid by their employer? Ever heard of conflict of interest and wondered why past presidents of AIPA have been so ready to roll over?
So many inaccuracies, so little time.
'Wealthy' trade union? Not compared to some!
Salaries paid by employer? They are still pilots and still flying the line so deserved to be paid for that flying.
Conflict of interest? It's been pointed out before (and I tend to agree that it is a conflict) BUT, the payment for our AIPA executive is something that we negotiated in previous EBAs. We did away with a percentage of a pay rise in order to see those situation as it is now. All that is conveniently forgotten now that the company doesn't want to sign an MOU that was negotiated at the same time as the EBA to go hand in hand with the EBA. So, far enough to stop the payment of those positions, give us the percentage of a pay rise back again!
Again, the salient lesson above could also apply to J*. QF have moved the goal posts despite what had been 'agreed to'. They are now applying the 'letter of the law' and any previous intent is null and void.