Originally Posted by
RedeyeAV8r
Lets first define things:
ALPA can't vote "for "or "Against" the Age change. They do not have any voting authority in the House or Senate. They can Offically oppose or support pending legislation on the Hill. I beleive it has already been explained why ALPA is considering no longer opposing any change to Age 60.
ALPA's Official stance as of today is Still "Opposed" (That might change this week during the Executive Board meeting, but the Stance today is still Opposed)
IPA's position on AGE 60 is "Nuetral" In other words they aren't taking any stance. I believe that is what DW was referring to as the "Easy way" out. BTW Isn't Bob Miller your Union President over age 60? What is his position? AHH I see he is nuetral on what he knows is a done deal.
ALPA could certainly continue to Oppose any change.
I believe that anyone who thinks anyone is going to stop this from happening is Smoking.cr**K, well lets hope the aren't drug tested too soon.
I believe ALPA leaders are merely trying to relay the inevtiable to the memebership. It is very clear that the majority of ALPA members would prefer the rule not change.
It is also clear that most of the ALPA members who prefer the rule not change, realize that it is going to change and they further realize that maybe, just maybe, ALPA might at least be able to steer some of the legislation to soften the blow of what we all know is negative for most of us.
So yes, ALPA leaders could have taken the easy way out and continued to oppose a rule that they know the can't stop. They made a tough call when they announced the effort to explore a change in stategy. Don't you think they knew many members would be angry? They knew it but they are hanging their necks out anyway. I am sure it was a tough call and Time will soon tell if they made the right call. If this rule get legislated this summer...................I can hear the calls now..........Where the Hell is ALPA and what are they doing about this.................Meanwhile the IPA leadership will still be nuetral, how convienent.
BTW what is CAPA (of which IPA is a part) doing with respect to this legislation? What Senators and Congressman do you have working on behalf of CAPA? and other Pilot specific issues? How much in PAC money have you guys raised again? I guess I'd take the easy way out too.
Let's see
SWA is for it
APA is opposed
IPA is Nuetral
RedeyeAV8R,
You really dislike the IPA,
Here is some things the lowly IPA pressed and push that benefit all of us. I have enclosed some excerpts.
* Cargo airliners were exempted from having to have collision avoidance systems (TCAS). The Independent Pilots Association (IPA) petitioned for rulemaking in 1996.
* Cargo airliners did not have to have escape slides at the entry doors, although some of these doors are up to 20 feet (three stories high) off the ground. The IPA petitioned for rulemaking filed in 1996.
* Cargo airliners were exempted from having to have fire suppression systems in cargo holds, although they are allowed to carry flammable, oxidizing and explosive hazardous materials not allowed on passenger aircraft. IPA comments in Docket 28937 requested fire-suppression capabilities for all cargo holds.
* Airports with only all-cargo operations do not have to have ARFF (Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting) services. The IPA still presses on the Hill for this legislation.
We asked for and rcvd help from ALPA as well as other cargo carriers.
As for CAPA,
"CAPA is a trade association comprised of over 22,000 professional pilots. CAPA's purpose is to address safety, security, legislative and regulatory issues affecting the professional flight deck crew member on matters of common interest to the individual member unions. The five members of CAPA are:
Allied Pilots Association (APA), Independent Pilots Association (IPA),
National Pilots Association (NPA), AirTran,
Southwest Airlines Pilots Association (SWAPA)
Teamsters Local 1224 ABX Air "
So CAPA would appear to be neutral on age 60 since it's members, like ALPA, have differing views. ibid NWA as stated by DW. and yet ALPA is "neutral" at this time.
Not everyone will be ALPA. It won't work at UPS, I didn't deem that, it comes from the membership, just like the SWAPA, APA, Teamsters etc. Other carriers resist any labor organization, JetBlue and Skywest for example. I am amused by the derogatory comments of ALPA towards others.
However, no aviator can objectively deny the many benefits all have gained by those in ALPA over the years either.
Some Hill work :
PROPOSAL TO REQUIRE TRAFFIC ALERT AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEMS ON CARGO AIRCRAFT
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1997
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Aviation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees...hpw105-5_0.htm
Excerpts..
Mr. DUNCAN. The subcommittee will come to order.
We've got some other Members on their way, but we're going to go ahead and get started here on time.
I would like to first say good afternoon and welcome to today's hearing regarding the issue of whether or not traffic alert and collision avoidance systems or TCAS, as it's commonly called, should be required aboard cargo aircraft.....
Currently, TCAS–II is required on commercial aircraft with a passenger seating configuration of more than 30 seats, and TCAS–I, at a minimum, is required on passenger aircraft with 10 to 30 seats.
The subcommittee is aware that the Independent Pilots Association, representing UPS pilots, has filed a petition for rulemaking with the FAA requesting that TCAS–II be required on cargo aircraft.
We have two panels filled with very distinguished witnesses from the Air Force, the Navy, the FAA, the National Transportation Safety Board, and we have a second panel consisting of representatives from the
Air Line Pilots Association, the Independent Pilots Association, the Teamsters Airline Division, the Air Freight Association....
...As you've mentioned,
we're reviewing a petition for rulemaking filed by the Independent Pilots Association that asks us to mandate the installation of TCAS–II on all transport category aircraft in cargo operations.
....
Mr. DUNCAN. And the petition that was filed that led to this hearing was filed by the Independent Pilots Association, and the next witness will be Captain Andre Dressler, who is a member of the Safety Committee for that association.
Captain Dressler, thank you for being with us.
Captain DRESSLER. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you very much for allowing me to speak to you today on this.
Talking here on behalf of the Independent Pilots Association, we are about 2,100 flight crew members, professional men and women that pilot the aircraft of the United Parcel Service.....
Other Hill issues:
Cargo security post 9/11: See “
IPA Lobbies Congress for Tougher Cargo Security.” Aviation Daily,January 6, 2003
FFDO:
how about the view many ALPA pilots had that were cognizant of DW's failure
to support an industry drive that was suppported by all the other labor unions and ALPA pilots who started APSA and the drive to "Petition to ARM PILOTS. This petition has been a coordinated effort between the Airline Pilots’ Security Alliance (APSA), the Allied Pilots Association (APA), the Southwest Airline Pilots Association (SWAPA), the Coalition of Airline Pilots Association (
CAPA), and the Independent Pilots Association (
IPA)."
Back to age 60:
You posted "IPA's position on AGE 60 is "Nuetral" In other words they aren't taking any stance. I believe that is what DW was referring to as the "Easy way" out. BTW Isn't Bob Miller your Union President over age 60? What is his position? AHH I see he is nuetral on what he knows is a done deal."
The IPA IS preparing the membership, as I stated in the previous post, the IPA has an AGE 60 Implementation Committee, composed of over and under 60 year old crewmembers who are preparing the IPA for implementation contractual issues, just like ALPA is doing. That is not "neutral" to activity, Like ALPA, the IPA isn't voting on this issue either. Bob Miller is one of five Executive Board members. He is one of five votes. Yes, he is over 60. he is not our king or dictator.
You posted "ALPA could certainly continue to Oppose any change.
I believe that anyone who thinks anyone is going to stop this from happening is Smoking.cr**K, well lets hope the aren't drug tested too soon."
We both agree on this
That is why the IPA website has posted all the organizations that are interested in change, and 25 other websites to allow individual members to educate themselves on the issues. Info on who to contact in the legislature etc. It is like a CSPAN arrangement. Pro and Con provided. I think that is smart for the IPA.