Originally Posted by
Fly4hire
There has been general discussion before concerning the de-certification of ALPA and the formation of an in-house union at various majors due to the inherent conflict in interest (Scope) of serving the needs of the legacy carriers as well of the feeders. Every action National takes is compromised by the need to serve the interests of groups with widely disparate needs, and in the process waters down it's product to the point of irrelevance. It's most notable achievements these days are it's monthly glossy self-promoting infomercial and fund raising to perpetuate itself.
DALPA is the 800 pound Gorilla in ALPA with close to 12000 dues paying members. It has the talent and the manpower to effectively duplicate almost every previously noteworthy ALPA function while better serving the needs of it's members far more efficiently
and with better cost effectiveness.
The recent Grievance Settlement over 76 seater's, while not attributable to ALPA National, serves to highlight the need for an aggressive position that serves the interests of DAL pilots, free from the influence of not-offending or conflicting with the interests of ALPA represented feeders.
DAL has enough pilots, similar to APA, where we can be highly effective as an independent union. Either National needs to start going back to it's roots of defending the profession instead of watering it down, or we should seriously consider striking out on our own. I see no way that National could or would encourage the feeders to leave. The feeders know they are better served by being part of ALPA and undermining from within than being independent.
Not so DALPA. Discuss......
Not being all that knowledgeable with scope, I think that eventually ALPA National cannot sufficiently represent both Mainline and Regional Companies without stepping over certain boundaries. The growth of mainline will hinder the growth at regionals, and vice versa.
I think scope should have been the line drawn in the sand a long time ago that distinguished the difference between Mainline Flying and Regional Flying. That line, in my opinion, should have been drawn by ALPA National, set in concrete, and non-negotiable within separate union groups.
On a sidenote, if standards at the regionals were raised in terms of Contracts, Work Rules, QOL, and salaries then the whole scope controversy would probably not be as big as an issue. I say that because it comes down to nickels and cents, if it's gonna cost mainline the same amount to build their regional subsidaries as it did to expand mainline flying it would be a mute point.