Originally Posted by
Eric Stratton
What is the conflict as you see it?
Our scope splits the union between "haves" who enjoy scope protection and can sell it, and the "have nots" who are commoditized fee for departure carriers who have nearly no scope.
Compass serves as a good example. Their MEC is contractually bound by another airline's MEC to a fleet of 36 airplanes. The Compass MEC and Compass Pilots had no voice in that restriction. How would we feel if another airline tried to restrict us to a fleet of 36 airplanes?
ALPA National is caught in the middle of our trying to control "our" outsourced flying and other airlines who think they should have the same rights that we enjoy. As a matter of law ALPA has to treat each member equally, but that gets tougher and tougher to do.
The conflict is a direct result of "our" flying that we don't perform. We can fix this by simply doing as much of our flying as we can.
Otherwise ALPA, our union, will be destroyed by this separate and unequal status of its members.
BUT - splitting ALPA, or leaving ALPA, will not fix this problem. I cite American and American Eagle's battles as an example of what we are in for. All we do is move the fight from Herndon VA to some District Court, probably in New York. In open Court the outcome is much less certain for both sides - and I'm warning everyone, we should try to fix the problem we have, not run from it. We should not follow the example of the US APA, or the APA.
ALPA, with it's warts, is better and more effective than the alternative.