PAT FRIEND RESPONDS TO MEMBER INPUT

You are correct that any AFA-CWA member has the right to challenge the results of a vote, whether it is a contract ratification vote or an officer election vote.

We have always respected that right, and this instance is no different. AFA-CWA is taking the challenge very seriously. We are conducting an internal audit while we await the documentation Mr. Meek has stated he will provide. Because we have a fiduciary responsibility to the members of the Union, it was also necessary to take steps to mitigate any damage that might result from a re-run vote with a different outcome. The distribution of the equity claim proceeds and other funds have been delayed out of necessity to avoid having the members, the officers and the Union face the possibility of a lawsuit from the Company or other creditors for the return of the money if the vote results are reversed.

While Mr. Meek has the right as a member to file a challenge, the Northwest flight attendant members have a right to be informed of the challenge and actions taken as a result of our fiduciary responsibilities. Mr. Ibarra identified himself as a leader of the "Committee for a Fair Vote" through emails authored and distributed by him. We have done nothing more than inform the members of the sequence of events triggered by the actions of Mr. Ibarra and Mr. Meek.

The Constitution and Bylaws does not require that the names of those challenging a vote be kept confidential. To the contrary, to maintain the members' faith in the integrity of the voting system, such inquiries must be conducted openly and subject to scrutiny. We have not "retaliated" against Mr. Ibarra and Mr. Meek in any way, nor do we condone retaliation. But, both Mr. Ibarra and Mr. Meek should know that their actions do not occur in a vacuum; rather, their actions have consequences. In this case, the direct consequence of the challenge that has been filed is to delay the distribution of the equity claim.

Finally, in Mr. Meek's letter of challenge he states that if this is not resolved to his satisfaction "there will be no alternative than to pursue other available avenues." The only reasonably interpretation of this statement is that Mr. Meek is prepared to pursue legal action in an effort to overturn the results of the contract ratification. Again, that is his right, but it is not without consequences.

Until Mr. Meek's challenge is resolved, or until it's withdrawn by Mr. Meek, distribution of the equity claim proceeds and other funds must continue to be delayed. I hope this clarifies the situation.