Originally Posted by
Buck Rogers
So here-in lies the rub with "revisionist' history. Some (a verrry small minority) come on here an make preposterous summations of past events. If you say that at the road shows ALL information was a hard sell, I can't refute that(however I find it hard to believe ALL info was a positive spin). I did interact with "black shirts" and the interactions I participated in and observed could be characterized as educational. I couldn't even get them editorialize/ hypothesize, they only wanted to address explanations of sections.
Here are some loose facts. Less than 10% of the pilots attended road shows. In road shows I have attended they typically start out with the vast majority of info flow being an explanation of all sections. Then they open it up for discussion/spear throwing. The vast majority of pilots get their info(if the even bother at all) by reading council news letters. I did read ALL the councils news letters. In my opinion any editorializing was fairly neutral( as has been posted here).
So when I read things like the following highlighted post I do agree that someone is trying to revise history. The question is who? And why? ( the agenda seems to be...ALPA - BAD, DALPA - BAD, MEC - BAD. All of these ALPA scoundrels are mgt shills trying to sell their fellow pilots down the river and are rotten bastards to the core) At least that is what the message seems to be to me and what you are selling
I know your rebuttal is going to be...."Trust but verify....or "learn from our "mistakes"...or something similar. I however have much greater confidence in our fellow pilots. They aren't 8 year olds that need counseling and education on such basic principals.Do I really need to insult their intelligence by trying to sell such platitudes? I don't believe so, if find it insulting
Almost 25% of Delta pilots were not here at the time of C2015 TA1 and one way for them to get info about our history is through avenues like this. Therefore both sides of an argument need to be made. Things that are verifiable carry more weight than unverifiable opinions
If you want verification click watch the youtube video of our MEC Chariman yelling at our Pilots at what would happen if we voted down the TA.
There is plenty of irrefutable verifiable evidence out there but most guys myself included did not feel the need to document it as it was happening.
My buddy was in the P2P program and when it became known that he was against the TA he was no longer scheduled for any more lounge visits.
You say:
If you say that at the road shows ALL information was a hard sell, I can't refute that(however I find it hard to believe ALL info was a positive spin).
Hell, no one can say that it was 100% hard sell I am sure some DALPA guys were against it but ask yourself a few questions:
If the union reps were not "selling it" why were many recalled from office by a Pilot group that rejected the TA? If the reps were neutral why would the Pilot group recall them?
Does our MEC Chairman seem neutral in his famous youtube clip?
There is tons of other irrefutable proof but my advice to you is just ask the Pilots who were around during the TA because ultimately the perception of a "sales job" is subjective. If you ask me I say total sales job.
But the funny thing out of this whole debacle is that we as a group fell into a pile of crap and came out smelling like a rose. Mostly due to good luck (after a decade of bad luck) and a critically thinking Pilot group, TA-1 fortuitously turned out to produce a very positive result - just not in the way DALPA envisioned.
Scoop