2025 Convention
- Thread starter MJ
- Start date
-
- Tags
- convention natca
tylertrend
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 187
-We're focusing on getting equipment upgrades
-Big win getting raises for new people who aren't certified on fuck all
-Our lawyers say all the CPC's already make plenty, except for those at the top of the band and end of careers..they needed more
-All Repubs are evil
#greatestjobintheworld.
There's your recap. Close thread.
-Big win getting raises for new people who aren't certified on fuck all
-Our lawyers say all the CPC's already make plenty, except for those at the top of the band and end of careers..they needed more
-All Repubs are evil
#greatestjobintheworld.
There's your recap. Close thread.
Soul_Controller
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 500
Not evil, stupid
Jay-Jay Jet Plane
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 123
You forgot
- dont you even dare think about recalling Nick
- we fucked up all the transfer policies days before the next panel, sorry not sorry.
- seniority? never heard of her
Last edited:
SteveMcCroskey
Member
- Messages
- 7
Seniority resets to 0 if you get a 56 waiver ...
- Messages
- 1,528
- Facility
- JNU Juneau Tower
This will be found to be illegal...Seniority resets to 0 if you get a 56 waiver ...
Non uniom members could not have seniority changed because they were still legally covered.
If A=B and B=C...
For those of you that can't read 8th grade math just know the old crusty fucks are staying weekends off and the union has no power for this after one of them (with their home they got for 10 potatoes and 20% bonus) lawyers up
I guess if they want try to ruin early retirement for the rest of us, they’ll have to go to court.
32andBelow
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 10,634
Boomers when they have to work tues Wednesday while they are collecting their 50k bonus.
Idk it's different than the guys that don't pay dues getting no seniority. This doesn't discriminate against non members, it applies to everyone equally 🤷♂️
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,246
Doesn’t make a distinction between members and non members
Phanatical
⭐SuperStar
- Messages
- 1,107
Unofficial Business Update (as of COB 5/10) :
Amendments
25-01: Adopted as amended
25-02: Not seconded
25-03: Adopted
25-04: Withdrawn
25-05: Not adopted
25-06: Not adopted
25-07: Withdrawn
25-08: Not adopted
25-09: Not adopted
25-10: Postponed indefinitely
25-11: Adopted
25-12: Not adopted
25-13: Not adopted
25-14: Not adopted
25-15: Not adopted
25-16: Adopted
25-17: Adopted
25-18: Adopted
25-19: Not adopted
25-20: Adopted
25-21: Adopted
25-22: Referred to National Election Committee
25-23: Not adopted
25-24: Not adopted
25-25: Not heard
(Out of Order) 25-33: Not adopted
25-26: Not adopted
25-27: Withdrawn by committee
25-28: Withdrawn
25-29: Referred to National Constitution Committee
25-30: Not adopted
25-31: Not adopted
25-32: Not adopted
25-34: Not adopted
25-35: Not adopted
25-36: Not adopted
25-37: Adopted
25-38: Not adopted
25-39: Not adopted
25-40: Not adopted
(Out of Order) 25-47: Laid upon the table
25-41: Not adopted
25-42: Not heard
25-43: Not adopted
25-44: Not heard
25-45: Adopted by Roll Call vote (11922/14713 81.03%)
Resolutions
25-01: Postponed to committee
25-02: Not adopted
25-03: Withdrawn
25-04: Ruled out of order
25-05: Not heard
25-06: Not adopted
25-07: Adopted
25-08: Not adopted
25-09: Withdrawn
25-10: Not adopted
25-11: Not adopted
25-12: Not considered
25-13: Not heard
25-14: Not adopted
25-15: Not adopted
25-16: Not adopted
25-17: Withdrawn
Amendments
25-01: Adopted as amended
25-02: Not seconded
25-03: Adopted
25-04: Withdrawn
25-05: Not adopted
25-06: Not adopted
25-07: Withdrawn
25-08: Not adopted
25-09: Not adopted
25-10: Postponed indefinitely
25-11: Adopted
25-12: Not adopted
25-13: Not adopted
25-14: Not adopted
25-15: Not adopted
25-16: Adopted
25-17: Adopted
25-18: Adopted
25-19: Not adopted
25-20: Adopted
25-21: Adopted
25-22: Referred to National Election Committee
25-23: Not adopted
25-24: Not adopted
25-25: Not heard
(Out of Order) 25-33: Not adopted
25-26: Not adopted
25-27: Withdrawn by committee
25-28: Withdrawn
25-29: Referred to National Constitution Committee
25-30: Not adopted
25-31: Not adopted
25-32: Not adopted
25-34: Not adopted
25-35: Not adopted
25-36: Not adopted
25-37: Adopted
25-38: Not adopted
25-39: Not adopted
25-40: Not adopted
(Out of Order) 25-47: Laid upon the table
25-41: Not adopted
25-42: Not heard
25-43: Not adopted
25-44: Not heard
25-45: Adopted by Roll Call vote (11922/14713 81.03%)
Resolutions
25-01: Postponed to committee
25-02: Not adopted
25-03: Withdrawn
25-04: Ruled out of order
25-05: Not heard
25-06: Not adopted
25-07: Adopted
25-08: Not adopted
25-09: Withdrawn
25-10: Not adopted
25-11: Not adopted
25-12: Not considered
25-13: Not heard
25-14: Not adopted
25-15: Not adopted
25-16: Not adopted
25-17: Withdrawn
Last edited:
Wizard
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 1,256
I’m sure you’re happy to take the benefits of the slate book and protections but fucking complain on an anonymous forum about it.
Raise when?
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 785
What about the people who complain when it’s not anonymous?
- Messages
- 1,528
- Facility
- JNU Juneau Tower
Was there a pdf of the amendments i lost my giant stack
I wonder what the eeoc will say. Maybe someone with a law degree can chime in. I think it's clear as day but we can try chatgpt too.
"The EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) enforces the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals who are 40 years of age and older. This means employers cannot treat older applicants or employees less favorably due to their age in any aspect of employment."
NATCA could argue that resetting seniority for individuals working under an age waiver is not based on age per se, but on a distinct employment status—waiver status—which applies only to those working beyond the standard retirement age of 56. From this perspective, the union might claim the reset is a reasonable administrative action intended to differentiate between those operating within the standard career lifecycle and those granted extensions under exceptional conditions. They may argue this is a "reasonable factor other than age" (RFOA) under the ADEA, particularly if they can show the policy is meant to maintain workforce flow, training opportunities, or organizational fairness for those who retire at the expected age. If the policy is written and applied neutrally, without ageist intent, and tied to the waiver status itself, it may survive legal scrutiny.
Opponents would argue that the seniority reset policy clearly impacts only older workers—specifically those over 56—and is therefore facially age-linked, regardless of how it is framed. Since only those above the statutory retirement age can even qualify for an age waiver, targeting this group for diminished seniority rights functions as a proxy for age discrimination. The ADEA prohibits disparate impact on workers over 40 unless the employer can prove the policy is based on an RFOA. Courts and the EEOC have held that administrative convenience or vague notions of fairness are generally not sufficient justifications. Unless the union can show a compelling, well-documented operational necessity for the reset—and that no less discriminatory alternatives exist—the policy could be found unlawful.
The hardcore ND people argued against adding Pay and Benefits to what the union should strive for. They argued its implied. Took someone reading a few other unions constitutions that said pay and benefits including the Flight attendants Union who just spoke.
Was crazy hearing people argue against pay and benefits at a unions convention
Was crazy hearing people argue against pay and benefits at a unions convention
- Messages
- 1,528
- Facility
- JNU Juneau Tower
Mike laying groundwork for his upcoming run
GroundClutter
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 262
That the guy putting everyone on blast over the EWR sector bullshit?
32andBelow
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 10,634
iT pUtS a TaRgEt On OuR BaCk
I would have asked, if it it’s “implied”, why aren’t they fighting for it? Sounds like they need to be told to do it.
The “benefits” of a 10+ year old contract? The “benefits” of some very shitty MOUs, the “benefits” of a Union whose hiding under its blankie because it puts a “target” on our back? I didn’t get a vote asking me if I wanted the Union to represent me. As a matter of fact, as a member, I’ve represented myself numerous times more than the local/region has/have/did.
I might be anonymous here - I’m anything but when I’ve tried to be part of the “fight”.
