True. ALPA national did absolutely nothing in our merger except collect more dues money after we negotiated a rate increase.

And they'll do nothing in a future ALPA/ALPA merger.

I'm not hoping for a windfall with a potential Alaska merger, but I don't want to be butt-rammed, either--which is how it's shaping up with ALPA at the helm.

Surely, despite bond/mckaskill, we'd do far, far better SLI-wise in an Alaska merger with our own independent union than we would with ALPA. We can stand up for ourselves without national working behind the scene to sandbag us.

So I ask: Will we be in better position to succeed as a pilot group in the next merger with or without ALPA? (ALPA waterboys, please don't waste our time droning on about the "benefits" of ALPA legal, etc.)