Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Terms? I doubt ALPA would care to treat it like a merger. AA would join under the existing, established structure, and would then by virtue of their not-insignificant constituency be able to attempt to make any changes.
I suppose allocation of current APA financial resources might be open to discussion, ie how much reverts to APA members vs. war chest for new ALPA MEC. I don't know how much if any ALPA National would want in the national kitty.
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
ALPA even referred to it as a merger in the announcemen. But practically speaking, I seriously doubt ALPA at large will be making any significant structural changes, other than the obvious representation appropriate for a large legacy. Ie ALPA HQ isn't moving to Dallas.
Of course that has to be agreeable to all concerned.
If history is any guide, during the Fedex Pilots Association merger with ALPA, part of the deal was that ALPA had to amend its constitution and by-laws in order to maintain FPA's existing representation structure of block representatives rather than base/seat representatives. So now the by-laws include the option for any MEC to choose one over the other or a hybrid. Also, if I remember correctly, during the National Pilots Association merger with ALPA, the NPA was required to fund a relatively small amount into the ALPA MCF and keep the rest of their war chest for their own MEC budget.
As for the use of the word merger, it's standard in past mergers because that's what it is. Two separate entities coming together and merging membership, assets and liabilities. As for the name, I don't care what the final entity is called. I would be fine with APA just as much as ALPA. They are just letters. It's the membership that makes the union and I believe that with AA pilots, the merged union would be that much more influential and able to advocate and make changes that affect all pilots.