Originally Posted by
DAL 88 Driver
"Scheming against its pilots" - Now who said that? I know I didn't.
What I did say is that ALPA National has a conflict of interest in representing both us and the outsourced pilots who are doing our flying. It's not some paranoid, evil plot against us. It's simply a case of conflicted priorities that has serious potential for compromised data and less than stellar advice. If you were getting a divorce, would you want the same attorney representing both you and your wife? Would a competent, ethical attorney even take that case?
Originally Posted by
acl65pilot
Difference is that we are the pilots with sole bargaining authority with DAL. If that was not the case, you would have a point, but we do and they do not. We would have to allow it. The analogy is apples and oranges.
DCI carriers bargain with their companies, we bargain with DAL. Huge difference than a divorce where you both bargain with a judge.
Originally Posted by
acl65pilot
No he said there is a conflict at National because the represent both of us and he used a divorce attorney analogy. I showed him how that logic is flawed because we have sole bargaining rights with DAL. Its a huge point that people want to gloss over.
Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
He didn't say that acl. Here is what he said:
Then you responded to his post with this insulting nonsense:
You'll note that yet again, you didn't respond to his issues...because you were too busy arguing a point that nobody but you is making.
Carl
Carl;
These points and rebuttals are more than just on the last few pages. These go back years now.
DAL 88 has long stated, as you have that there is a conflict at national because or regionals and mainline. We got that. It has also been stated, and many agree that National has helped the RJ drivers to our detriment. Many wonder if there would be a DFR lawsuit if we recaptured scope, many state that our attorneys cannot effectively represent us because they are representing the regionals.
DAL88 uses the analogy of a divorce attorney versus the ALPA National attorneys and which I would prefer. How can they represent both? I clearly stated how, and everyone seems to skim over that part.
He did not use the word scheming, I did. If he does not feel that way, great, I apologize, but it is how I interpret his tone and word usage.
Sitting down with the pilots and lawyers that do this work on or behalf is where the whole, you need to see it to understand it came. If you recall way back in 2007 I stated that there is a conflict at National. Well I was right. It is a perceived conflict, not a real one. ALPA needs to do a better job of explaining it.
As for your charge, that I respond to my own posts and arguments, I do that because there are points I make that are important that no one wants to consider. They are points that do not work for your argument. Facts like we are the sole bargaining agent that deals with DAL sets all of this conflict stuff to rest. If we were dumb enough to ever give that away, it would not matter if we were ALPA or not, everyone would be bargaining with DAL. As of now, we are the only ones that get to do that, and even if DAL tried to do that say with RJET, it would easily be thrown out in an arbitration or court of law.