Originally Posted by
Meme In Command
Everyone mentions ALPA flip flopping as if it was a last minute betrayal. What I'm seeing is "I don't want you to screw me, but if you're going to anyways I want to at least have a say in how" and I don't necessarily have a problem with that. If 67 becomes inevitable, then Im fine with ALPA changing rhetoric to keep a seat at the implementation table.
It was a last minute betrayal. In the aftermath of 9/11, ALPA literally folded on everything. Nothing was sacred: scope, pensions, pay, retirement age, you name it... In ALPA's view, nothing seemed worth holding the line for. MEC after MEC would fold under threat of bankruptcy after ALPA National's strong-arming, only for the company to file for Chapter 11 anyway and now use now concessionary contract as the starting point for further cuts, but this time while in Chapter 11.
ALPA was opposed to Age 65, and they even ran at least one or two membership-wide surveys which told them that majority of ALPA did not support changing the mandatory age. So when "Fair Treatment of EXPERIENCED Pilots" passed, ALPA changed its stance and then supported raising the age, despite that thousands of pilots were furloughed for years, and many mainline jobs were flown for pennies on the dollar because regional FO's would qualify for public assistance.
I think our disagreement stems from belief that I think an organization such as ALPA has a duty to represent and fight for its members. During those years, it failed miserably on multiple fronts, not just Age 60. That was just a nail in the coffin for me.