You folks? I guess because I asked
legitimate questions that I'm now an apologist? Calm down from what? There's a major problem with a group that says that ALPA FPL is bad yet seeks to
increase it for the DPA going forward.
I bullet pointed the facts supporting my one major issue. I have one issue and one issue only. That is that the plan the DPA has to improve and do better than ALPA is flawed to the point that I don't believe it's a real plan at all.
Are you really unable to address the DPA constitution using any one of the bullet points? The DPA is saying ALPA sucks. They are saying they will be better. The "better" plan currently isn't better, it's worse. Well the items I looked at are worse. The current DPA plan does not make for a better ALPA sans ALPA. It's a mess.
Go back and look at the fact that Tim writes emails saying that "DPA assured the decision makers that DELTA PILOTS DO NOT BEAR ANY INDIVIDUAL LIABILITY in the damages outcome, a position confirmed publicly by ALPA" and yet a few days later was saying the TWA trial will affect you financially. Which is it? Did he lie to us or lie to the bank? You can't assure a bank that there's no personal liability and then turn around and tell the DPA members that there is. Maybe Tim doesn't write all the updates?
Here's the bullet points again, and these are just the glaring issues:
- DPA announces dues will be lowered to anywhere between 1%-1.75% depending on where you read the website yet the constitution says they will go up without MEMRAT to 2.25% next year. ALPA can't raise dues today without a vote.
- They say that FPL is bad yet they increased FPL for all volunteers including those that don't get FPL like that today over today's limits and pay for it out of the budget since they will take that money value assigned to the contract and spread it amongst the pilots. No, wait, make that the reps as the FPL is going up the money would go to them not the CBA.
- USAPA payed over $7 million in legal fees to SSM&P in less than 4 years after the vote. SSMP&P is charging 50% of their $250 fee, per their contract, with the rest outstanding after certification, yet the DPA has mysteriously paid a number so small that it can only be called incidental costs from the DPA logs. Where's the legal bill?
- There's a second law firm on the DPA books that has charged more to the DPA than SSM&P so far. Who could that be possible?
- New hires, pilots returning from disability and MILOA can't be reps for 2 years, nor could a pilot from a merged airline because of the 2 year good standing rule
- New hires have to pay a maintenance fee their first year. Not about money, right?
- Look through the USAPA LM2 and see the 6 figure employees they have. You want to know why? That's what good help costs today.
- "A contract which is understandable, enforceable and beneficial to both parties and should not exceed 200 pages." Really? Beneficial to the company? An iron clad 200 pages?
- Voting on everything and everybody. Where will you find the time?
- 25% of the pilots in a block to get a resolution passed vs simply majority at an LEC today? Harder to use the pilots will.
You highlighted the USAPA stuff as if it were irrelevant. It's not. There is a significant law bill due after certification. I want (under the guise of transparency) to know how much that final 100% bill is going to be. Looking through the financials the DPA hasn't been billed for the 50% yet, let alone the balance due.
It's a straw man of wicker man proportions to say that the DPA will be immune from lawsuits of any kind and in particular the DFR. The $7 million in fees that SSM&P billed USAPA at $140,000 per month is relevant because I want to know that a similar bill isn't coming to us. I know the USAPA guys have extenuating circumstances but we could have a merger that doesn't fly with guys too and that will generate more lawsuits. It's not out of the realm of discussion that the new law firm, which is due monies upon certification, may end up charging as much as our current lawyers.