Originally Posted by
Sink r8
I agree with points 1 and 2, and your conclusion. I shouldn't be angry, but I am. I'm willing to set it aside for the common good.
As far as point 3, it's not a material issue, in light of the number of alter-egos, but OK.
WRT 4, I make absolutely no distinction between Lawson and the RJDC. One's just the unofficial arm of the other, both are a gamble to force something through that was always a non-starter. Both are part of the reason we speak about network or national unity as hypotheticals.
Sorry, but I must disagree. The change that made "network or national unity a hypothetical" was done in 1998 and affirmed at the 2000 BOD meeting.
Lawson, the RJDC, and furloughs were the unwitting fall out; reactions to, and effects of, a policy of disunity. All of those unfortunate things came after ALPA's policy change on alter-ego and were a result of the conflict created by that policy change.
Unity is the high ground. Whoever supports unity will eventually win.
Getting back to the topic of the DPA fight, this is like Gettysburg. The DPA may have even fought a hell of a battle up to now, but like the Confederate General, they don't have a map of this foreign soil they are about to fight on. ALPA may have screwed up and let the DPA within a couple days march to Herndon, but ALPA somewhere has maps. Those maps show where the high ground is ... unity.
Unity is there for the taking right now. The DPA has failed to sieze upon it.