Originally Posted by
baseball
I believe those are two major flaws in your argument.
1. Peoples perceptions are their realities. If the person who is paying the bills says it is what it is, then guess what, that's what it is. The ALPA pyramid puts members on top and leadership at the bottom. If the mainline duespaying members indicate a preference on an issue based on their perceptions it is what it is. Read "flying the line." what I posted on American comes from there. That was their perception about how ALPA got it wrong on turbo props and the commuter industry. They weren't wrong.
2. Your argument about RJ pilots control over scope has nothing to do with the conflict of interest. The conflict of interest exists elsewhere as previously pointed out. Scope is definitely a part of the argument, but you incorrectly connect two separate issues, likely because you don't understand it, or you intentionally want to confuse people. RJ pilots perceived control or lack of control is not germane to the discussion.
1. If a poll of certain number of people says they perceive the sky to be purple, does that make it reality?
2. I’m trying to reduce this conversation to it’s foundation. And that’s scope. If there was a way for a regional pilot group to be able to negotiate a modification of mainline pilot scope, then there would be standing on your argument and we could move to a discussion on how dues money is distributed or changing the structure of ALPA so as to essentially make regional pilot groups independent, etc. But since that is not the case that any regional pilot group can change mainline scope, the argument fails the first test, standing, because there would be no competing interests.