Originally Posted by
brakechatter
In that light, let me know if I did not answer you questions satisfactorily.
Ok, since you asked. ... I offer this for your consideration:
Originally Posted by
brakechatter
2) Fiduciary duty--You'll have to forgive me, but it is a term largely used in a negative connotation. It is also a term heralded in the legal world as grounds for legal action. I certainly do not appreciate its use here, as I think it is hugely premature.
2>
Fiduciary Duty, simply explained, is putting the good of your pilots first, above your own.
It bothers me that those who are running for an office (
not just you) have no idea what the basic responsibilities of that office is. It astonishes me that when asked, no one in ALPA can define the term. It is not difficult. As pilots we do this all the time, we place the well being and safety of our passengers above our own selfish desires. We even place the well being of the company before our own desires. As a Rep, it would be your job to place the well being of your pilots before your personal desires, simple.
There is no need to fear "fiduciary duty." In my other job I represent people and corporations and am proud to execute my "fiduciary duty" professionally. As a servant, I do not engage in double dealing to screw my client(s). Unfortunately, the same can not be said for many in ALPA service. The long line of ALPA's legal failures clearly indicate that many get into the job without understanding what the heck the job is. ALPA then completely fails to train them resulting in failures at the negotiating table and loss of our Major Contingency Funds. Last year ALPA spent more defending itself that it did representing pilots! That needs to be fixed.
Originally Posted by
brakechatter
3) 76 seat flying. Scope is an issue near and dear to my heart since my American Eagle days. It is section 1 for a reason. It seems as if it is finally starting to attract the attention which it deserves. I would like to use our unity to capture, recapture, and redefine scope in our favor at every opportunity.
Fantastic answer - perfect! Cheers!
Originally Posted by
brakechatter
4) Representation. My gut tells me: Compass IN. I have not been a party to the meetings where the Compass discussion has been in play. From what I gather, they are eager to be a part of the Delta MEC. A wholly owned with truly altruistic motives is a good thing, and provides more of that unity which I think will more than offset any negative that comes with it.
Again, perfect answer in my opinion.
Originally Posted by
brakechatter
5) Flow through agreements--have saved between 500-2000 furloughs on Delta property. I have nothing to back that up other than "connecting the dots." It has provided an important stop gap for what I hope will become less and less of an issue going forward.
Flow downs have failed at US Air, United, American and mark my words, it will not work here either.
I was incredulous at Council 44's brief that our contract was working because it is so poorly written that no one can figure out how to execute the flow down to Compass. It works because it doesn't work, thus saving jobs. My analogy would be more like a turd in the toilet that backs up the flow momentarily before being pushed down with increased velocity. Management has the plunger and has indicated they will use it in September 2010.
(right on time for my December 2010 furlough prediction made back during the JPWA debate in 2008)
The correct answer, which you already raised, would be to get Compass on the list now. A flow down is no replacement for unity. A flow down only facilitates outsourcing by providing a mechanism to replace mainline jobs with regional jobs within our brand.