Originally Posted by
GunshipGuy
I see what you did there. While it's cute it is illustrative of the attitude and defensiveness that arises when our union finds itself critiqued in any fashion.
ALPA is fair game for criticism! Our union is responsible for explaining its methods, and seeking improvement as the industry evolves and changes.
Originally Posted by
GunshipGuy
That said, I feel you need the dots connected: Outstanding and respected organizations set goals and objectives and measure themselves by how well they meet them. RA sets goals for the company--very specific numbers. Very objective goals.
Bad comparison. RA doesn't have a rank-and-file and is only accountable to people (shareholders) who are, for the most part, not connected to the enterprise he's running. He doesn't work under the terms he negotiates. He doesn't send his deals out to the "membership" to ratify.
Originally Posted by
GunshipGuy
DALPA sets subjective goals which allows them to declare success since there's nothing specific to be measured by. As for the dot connecting: To claim to have specific and objective goals to be measured, and then to cite the survey is laughable---since the survey results are kept secret.
I dont' think ALPA sets subjective goals. I think ALPA sets
collective goals. There is a big difference! The priorities of all of us are surveyed, analyzed, and negotiated. Your priorities in any specific of the contract are probably different than mine. If ALPA set the
specific objectives of attaining mine - which don't match yours - it could cause problems.
I think the MEC wants C2015 to be successfully ratified. To do that, they have to deliver a deal that meets most of the objectives of most of us.