Originally Posted by
Mesabah
You are 100% correct on all points, the problem is, ALPA merger policy is not actually used in ALPA merger policy, it is set up to fail, that way the union doesn't take the blame. If you merge with say Alaska, you must be hostile to the Alaskan group to protect your seniority. However, since you use ALPA policy first, you have to work together. This is the ultimate flaw in ALPA. No one is debating that ALPA is the absolute best at contract negotiations and other services. The problem is ALPA doesn't care who is in the seat. They may be able to negotiate $500 an hour for a wide body captain, but they don't care if it is you, or me sitting in that seat. You better believe SWAPA cares whether or not a former SWA pilot is sitting in the correct seat. Does that make sense?
This is the reason ALPA outsources to gain max profits, they don't care about who is flying the plane, as long as it is an ALPA pilot.
Thanks for the reply. Quick response... have a family commitment.
I'm trying to see your argument, but I only had time to read your post once, and I really don't see what you mean. "ALPA" doesn't decide who is in the seat: the arbitrators do, and the respective MEC's/MC's present the case strictly for their pilots, not for ALPA or anyone else.
Are you making another argument, that ALPA doesn't favor mainline drivers or RJ drivers by serving as the association for both? They don't have to: each branch represents their own interests.