2024 NATCA Election & The Purple and Light Blue CBAs

Are you waiting to see how the current CBA negotiations play out before submitting your vote?

  • My vote will not be impacted by the result of the Purple and Light Blue CBA negotiations.

    Votes: 69 57.5%
  • I am awaiting potential results of the Purple & Light Blue CBA negotiations before I cast my ballot.

    Votes: 38 31.7%
  • I currently am abstaining from/unable to cast a ballot.

    Votes: 13 10.8%

  • Total voters
    120
  • Poll closed .
Congress wouldn’t have fixed that law without involvement from Natca. You think the FAA was going to tell congress to give us free leave ?

You said 2152 were automatically entitled to it. You are wrong, they weren’t. The law needed changed, Natca got that done. Get over it.

Did congress “fix” it? Are you sure that’s why we get PPL? I did some research and it looks like 05/13/20 the Agency agreed to an MOU giving us PPL by October of that year without any law change. Section 5 of that MOU states that IF law is passed, the parties will meet within 14 days. As far as I can tell, that hasn’t happened. So it appears to me that the Agency did in fact agree to give us all this leave without congress or any change or amendment to law. I am less aggressive than you and I am open to the possibility of being wrong. You asserted NATCA fixed the LAW so please direct me to the passed legislation. I’d love to read it.

On 12/27/21 another law passed that afforded title 5 employees to 2 weeks of paid Parental Bereavement Leave if they lose a child. Technically I suppose we were exempt from this benefit also - yet I don’t remember any outrage. In fact, I don’t remember hearing about this at all. The agency then afforded this leave to all employees in a HRPM (LWS 8.23) signed 9/9/22. The NATCA MOU for this leave was signed two weeks AFTER the HRPM on 9/27/22. Again, I’m open to being wrong, but as far as I can tell the Agency gave us this leave without any change to law and without NATCA. NATCA didn’t get an MOU signed before hand to get the Agency to commit to giving us this leave. The Agency just did it. And this was a near identical situation to PPL. To me it kinda reiterates that NATCA exaggerated their influence in the PPL situation to try and sell their value to the members and take a little more credit than they deserved.

Not that I think NATCA is without value.

But if they were really working hard and making sure the agency complies with benefits afforded to us under new legislation we would have a policy on the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. Which we are NOT exempt from and has been effective for 18 months now. Yet the Agency hardly knows it exists, no one is trained or educated on it and NATCAs best effort is an email a week or two ago telling us we can take an eLMS course on it.

It’s hard to buy into the NATCA narrative here when there are such inconsistencies.
 
Does anyone think that NATCA will get the new contract signed prior to the new administration taking power? Are they in a rush to try and lock in certain policies such as telework etc. to undermine Trump and DOGE?
 
Does anyone think that NATCA will get the new contract signed prior to the new administration taking power? Are they in a rush to try and lock in certain policies such as telework etc. to undermine Trump and DOGE?
There kind of appears to be a flurry of deals being signed by the Biden administration on his way out.
 
Does anyone think that NATCA will get the new contract signed prior to the new administration taking power? Are they in a rush to try and lock in certain policies such as telework etc. to undermine Trump and DOGE?
Per the CBA briefing telecons that NATCA has held last week and yesterday, the negotiating team's hope/ambition/plan is that everyone will fall in line and vote for this CBA, and they can have it implemented a week before the new administration comes to power.
 
FYI... here are the numbers provided to me from a Region X source that they received via Region X email.

"Out of the 1,595 total eligible voters, 991 (or over 62%) used our collective voice to approve this agreement. Over 96.5% voted to ratify."

Math says the vote was roughly 957-34.
Wasn't Region X one of Nick's biggest supporters in the election? It doesn't surprise then that they'd buy his BS and ratify the contract. Hopefully they didn't vote in favor solely based off telework cause that probably won't last too long
 
Wasn't Region X one of Nick's biggest supporters in the election? It doesn't surprise then that they'd buy his BS and ratify the contract. Hopefully they didn't vote in favor solely based off telework cause that probably won't last too long
Telework was literally one of the biggest things they talked about during the briefings; and they would deflect whenever it was brought up that telework could be rescinded. It was infuriating; even more so now, knowing that there were only apparently 34 of us under that contract that aren't cowards.
 
Telework was literally one of the biggest things they talked about during the briefings; and they would deflect whenever it was brought up that telework could be rescinded. It was infuriating; even more so now, knowing that there were only apparently 34 of us under that contract that aren't cowards.
It’s getting rescinded like the first week of the contract
 
Telework was literally one of the biggest things they talked about during the briefings; and they would deflect whenever it was brought up that telework could be rescinded. It was infuriating; even more so now, knowing that there were only apparently 34 of us under that contract that aren't cowards.
This board said you lost 957-34 those are flat earther numbers
 
This board said you lost 957-34 those are flat earther numbers
Like I posted earlier in the Eugene Freedman thread, I think the Region X people vastly outweigh SSS people.

I know at least 1/4th of the no votes were SSSs I've spoken to. But yeah, the fact that there were only 34 of us really speaks to the top-down group-think bullshit a lot of the NATCA membership is caught up with. Too comfortable and agreeable to living on their knees.
 
Like I posted earlier in the Eugene Freedman thread, I think the Region X people vastly outweigh SSS people.

I know at least 1/4th of the no votes were SSSs I've spoken to. But yeah, the fact that there were only 34 of us really speaks to the top-down group-think bullshit a lot of the NATCA membership is caught up with. Too comfortable and agreeable to living on their knees.
I know that voting is “anonymous” but its crazy to think its only 34. I know of at least 4 SSS that voted no for sure. This would be a case where id love them to break the numbers down more by group.
 
I know that voting is “anonymous” but its crazy to think its only 34. I know of at least 4 SSS that voted no for sure. This would be a case where id love them to break the numbers down more by group.
I'm skeptical it's even anonymous.

In order to vote they send you an Email with a PIN which you then take to the NATCA site, enter that PIN, and then vote. So I guess if they wanted to track who voted yes and who voted no they could just track who entered which PIN and voted no.
 
I'm skeptical it's even anonymous.

In order to vote they send you an Email with a PIN which you then take to the NATCA site, enter that PIN, and then vote. So I guess if they wanted to track who voted yes and who voted no they could just track who entered which PIN and voted no.
The website was not a NATCA website and the email with the PIN did not come from NATCA.

And I don't mind if NATCA knows I voted NO. Everyone I work with knows I voted NO because I told them I was voting NO and why... all NATCA has to do is ask around. Don't care, no f*cks given.
 
The website was not a NATCA website and the email with the PIN did not come from NATCA.

And I don't mind if NATCA knows I voted NO. Everyone I work with knows I voted NO because I told them I was voting NO and why... all NATCA has to do is ask around. Don't care, no f*cks given.
During one of the Q&A sessions I told LeBovidge his team failed and negotiated a bad contract and the new "collaboratively" negotiated contract was just submission and subservience by a more polite name. I'm pretty sure they know how I voted...
 
During one of the Q&A sessions I told LeBovidge his team failed and negotiated a bad contract and the new "collaboratively" negotiated contract was just submission and subservience by a more polite name. I'm pretty sure they know how I voted...
Remember when he told everyone how he was spearheading mental health for all us? Wonder where everyone’s mental health is at now that in the span of a week we’ve been told:
1.Give us more money
2. You make enough money
3. We will not fight for you whatsoever
 
Back
Top Bottom