Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
And I don't think anyone here would agree with your assertion that I've been unwilling to engage on this topic.
By "engage" I mean respond with something other than a condescending "
your view" dismissal of facts.
You're a bit touchy when you have to defend instead of criticize. Defense takes more than quips and sound bites.
Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
I don't know when you became an ALPA member. I became one in 1979. My dues have gone up and down many times from the approximately 2% level over the years. Not including the many special assessments for special circumstances. I'd expect that from any union, so it doesn't surprise me and I've never raised it as an issue or concern. It's being raised now as a DALPA talking point because of panic at the possibility of an ALPA decertification vote. It's the outrage du juor.
Hardly. ALPA has a record on the topic of dues. It must be accountable for that record. DPA has a hypothetical method for dues. Since it doesn't have a record, its hypothetical should be applied to a reasonable model to see if it's plausible. That's not an
outrage du jour unless you think only unions you don't like should be scrutinized.
Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
You're arguing with yourself. I've not spoken on the topic.
Yeah, you did. You dismissed facts as "views" and "opinions". I think it's because you don't want to acknowledge the facts.
Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
Again, you'll understand my lack of concern over your opinion about my integrity. I do find it interesting that your last post was on July 22, and you just happened to swing by and respond to my responses to hitimefurl. I'm OK with DALPA sponsored rent-a-mobs...free speech and all, but I don't think it puts your integrity in play. You're merely responding to the DALPA "all hands on deck" call to man the forums.
Nice deflection! You've mastered that skill when you're defensive.