Sadly, if 11,000 pilots emailed their respective LEC reps and demanded a copy of the opener, which would be kept private by us, our expectations would be managed, and we'd be told no, because we can't be trusted. If DPA were to release their opener, and the company responded aggressively with "our best counter offer is X, take it or leave it" (which I strongly suspect they would do), then in another form our expectations would be managed, because we can't be trusted. This isn't a battle we should expend any effort on. With good data and a strong turn out the ALPA bean counters will draft an opener most likely 1.0 standard deviations above the mean. And as long as we were vocal during elections of negotiators then certainly the rest of our opener is a known quantity. You wouldn't elect a Democrat to ban abortions would you? So did we elect negotiators who wouldn't tirelessly negotiate a better section 1 for us? Oooops.

Does anyone know why we don't have a proactive and thriving P2P committee here? It's because most MECs feel that the feedback is unproductive and from the vocal minority (which is incorrect). But they worked so hard for their positions of authority in ALPA. I guess we have to trust them. Either that or recall them. Which as long as you have a candidate to replace them with is a transparent and successful process. Everyone knows what P2P is, right?

I hope we're all working to unify and motivate the silent majority. Because ALPA sure isn't. And neither is DPA. Then again - until it came recall time, it wouldn't do any good.

Signed,

Realistic Expectations