LEC 169 RECALL TRACKER

About The Recall

This site exists to document, explain, and track the LEC 169 recall.

The single most significant charge.

Supported the removal of the entire Negotiating Committee despite no evidence of broad membership support.
Did not conduct meaningful polling or engagement before taking the action.
Ignored warnings from experienced negotiators, attorneys, and labor professionals about the consequences.
Created a delay in negotiations and uncertainty regarding representation at the bargaining table.
The fundamental question is: How do elected representatives remove the entire bargaining team without first seeking the input of the pilots they represent?

A recurring theme throughout the crisis.

Major decisions were made in executive session with limited explanation afterward.
Membership was often informed of decisions after the fact rather than before.
Communications frequently described administrative actions but did not explain the strategic rationale behind them.
Pilots were expected to trust decisions without being provided the information necessary to evaluate them.
Representation requires accountability. Accountability requires transparency.

This may be the strongest local-council argument.

LEC 165 and 169 repeatedly failed to hold the membership meetings pilots requested.
Other councils continued to hold meetings and engage their pilots during the same period.
Members seeking answers were often directed to newsletters, podcasts, or social media rather than direct discussion with elected representatives.
Opportunities to gather feedback before major decisions were missed.
Representation is not something that happens to members. It should happen with members.

Relied on procedural mechanisms that allowed decisions to be made without direct membership involvement.
Used voting structures that amplified council influence while reducing the ability of individual pilots to weigh in.
Created the perception that process was being used to avoid accountability rather than facilitate representation.
Even if technically permissible, many pilots believe these procedures were used contrary to the spirit of representative government.

This is broader than any one decision.

No clearly articulated plan for negotiations after removing the NC.
Committees were left operating without clear direction and later became scapegoats when problems emerged.
Key positions became vacant through resignations and turnover.
Communications focused on administrative milestones rather than a comprehensive strategy to return the pilot group to a position of strength.
The issue is not whether mistakes were made. Every leadership team makes mistakes. The issue is whether there was a coherent strategy before and after those mistakes occurred.