Originally Posted by
CLazarus
I don't really care whether any pilot rep sitting on the BOD has to maintain confidentiality, has earmuffs on during meetings, or if he has to listen to a steady stream of propaganda (I'd hope he's sharp enough to filter at least some of it out). What matters is that he provides something that few BOD members have... a pilot's perspective and VOICE! There are countless folks on Boards with MBAs and JDs but not enough with ATPs or line experience. If we don't get a seat at the BOD we don't get much influence on company direction outside of contract negotiations. Maintaining relationships at the BOD level is essential to having influence. It is debatable who should represent the pilots, and I'm sure some candidates would represent us better than others. But, with little to lose and much to gain I am surprised that anyone would question the value of having a pilot on the BOD.
Actually there's allot to lose. First, you don't get any influence. Second, the BOD knows who you are and who you aren't. Third, The BOD doesn't care about someone who isn't in the club, and will not listen to him/her. Fourth, there will be no relationship. You are labor and they know it.
Why allot to lose? History shows that the BOD is skillful at manipulating perspective and their version of the facts. Usually results in Stockholm Syndrome. We don't need a union that comes down with this illness.
I think we would see more results in getting a pilots perspective in the inside of the operation. Not impressed with Howard Attarian. ALPA already has substantial influence in all important processes and most CPO's. ALPA should focus on defeating agreements and treaties that diminish our bargaining position and endanger the career path by focusing on flags of convenience carriers, open skies abuses, nafarious code-share agreements, government subsidized carriers who want to "compete" in the USA. No BOD rep will help us with these (most important) issues.