Polar Arbitration III(a)

[JohnGalt]

(1) WhaleFR8 says…..”I do have insight why he was there. He was there to represent the Atlas Pilots and to make sure that the hearings were conducted honestly and with integrity….” [Sounds a little like Alexander Haig after Reagon was shot in 1981----I’m in charge]

(2) WhaleDriver says….”What, you don't like it because he may actually curtail some free wheeling spin of the truth (lying) by the Polar MEC at this and other proceedings? If he's there to maintain some semblance of truth, bravo….”

My, My, My….What idiotic, moronic, and insane statements!!!

Can you imagine how the arbitrator would react to such statements? To be told that he is incapable of managing a fair and impartial hearing is beyond belief.

The arbitrator is an esteemed and well regarded professional who has conducted 100’s of arbitrations over the past 30 years. To imply that this gentleman cannot preside over a fair arbitration on the matters at hand is totally freaking nuts. Says a lot about intellect and creditability of WhaleFR8 and WhaleDriver.

(3) fuego says…..”The simple fact is, the presence of the Negotiation chair of the Atlas membership is to see first hand what can affect the Atlas crewmembers again as a result of this arbitration. Anything less would be irresponsible to the Atlas membership.

A fair statement. If I were the Atlas MEC, I would want to know everything possible that could affect my pilots. My problem would be one of ethics. If I could cut a deal and get in bed with AAWH mgt to gain this insight, I would have to weigh the pros and cons of such a decision. The upside is I get info. The downside is that I would be negatively viewed by my union brethren in the industry for interfering in somebody else’s business. The Atlas MEC chose to get the “info” and the Atlas Negotiating Committee Chairman chose to be the Alger Hiss.

The Polar union objected to the presence of the Atlas Air Negotiating Committee Chairman at these hearings. The arbitrator agreed that this was a fair challenge and asked AAWH why this “third party” was present. Jim Cato, AAWH mgt, then piped up and said that this mole, sorry, I mean individual, was to be a witness and testify on AAWH’s behalf. The arbitrator ruled saying that if this was so, then the “third party” could stay.

So it really boils down to ethics. The Atlas MEC and the Atlas Negotiating Committee Chairman should ask themselves these questions:

--- What price do I sell my soul for?
--- How low do I stoop to obtain my objectives?
--- Can I look myself in the mirror?
--- How much do I value my word and integrity?