Thread: ALPA's purpose
View Single Post
Old 03-30-2009 | 07:43 AM
  #15  
1515greenlight
Line Holder
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
From: Facing forward, punching buttons
Default

A fine story, but just that: a story. It doesn't quite jive with the facts.

Yet another case of, "If Todd wasn't there, it didn't happen."


I'm currently a member of a CAPA member union, the NPA. Unfortunately, I'm all too familiar with the worthlessness of CAPA.

Let's see, that would be AirTran? The fact that your in house union is in disarray and you've been through what, FIVE negotiating committees and can't figure out how to move forward, is CAPA's fault? That's like a teenager crashing the family car and blaming his parents for leaving gas in the tank! Your in house union's problems are yours, not CAPA's. According to the statements in the press, that's why IBT took a pass on AirTran; they said you needed to get your own house in order first before joining another union. In other words, why should they inherit your mess and try to sort it out when you can't do it yourself?

You left an ALPA regional carrier for AirTran because you wanted a bigger jet than an RJ and you knew what the problems were. Is CAPA your registered bargaining agent or is NPA?

CAPA could possibly cease being useless if the organization would change the way it does business. Unanimous consent is no way for an organization to get anything done. It basically limits CAPA to only working on safety and security issues, because you can never get the full CAPA BOD to unanimously agree on just about anything else. Even a 2/3 majority requirement would be a step in the right direction, but requiring unanimous consent to take a position on an issue is a prohibitive policy.[/quote]

This is an interesting charge, because ALPA adopted the unanimous consent concept a few years back. Instead of having reasoned and sometimes heated debate over issues that sometimes led to numerous division of the house and roll call votes, they went to a practice that turned the BOD and other meetings into rubber stamp events. Why? To save money. The result was predictable and with the "A" (legacy carriers and FDX) having the 51% majority, guess who will be left at the altar?

And yes, my error on the controller groups. I meant PATCO, who still represents controllers as well as NATCA.
Reply