Originally Posted by
forgot to bid
I'm going to say, if Praeter wins ALPA National again, those cards should be flying in.
I'm for DALPA with no ALPA National. I want LEC and MEC elections at DALPA, I want to elect the Chairman. Thats not to say I wouldn't chose LM, I'm just saying I want to chose. I want competition all of the time, political parties give you that, it'd be nice to see parties. You could have a Pro-Company and Anti-Company and Worthless Finger-in-the-Air Moderates party.
If you can't have DALPA wihtout ALPA... then DPA.
Need pull on Capitol Hill, how about when APA, UCAL-PA and DALPA come together on a topic, thats some pull. If not, then ALPA doesn't have any pull anyways.
Interesting. I was just thinking about that this morning: identifiable groups and platforms would be very helpful. Parties: I'm in.
Also, I don't see why we can't vote for the guy that heads the union. If you could combine that with virtual meetings, you could actually get a feel for the people running.
As far as reviewing the influence of National on local afairs, and modifying the bylaws a little... absolutely. I think a lot of that already has been happening.
Now, back to parties. What I want is to be able to identify is a group, its' backers, and the vision. You said "If not ALPA without DALPA, then DPA". But... what's DPA's platform? And who are the people involved? Maybe we can get independent confirmation of this, but my source says DPA is a bunch of guys in Florida, anchored by JM and other former reps. These are the same guys that were behind the recall efforts in 44 last year.
For those who weren't at Delta as we entered BK, JM was the previous Chairman. He has enjoyed respect from the group for being the negotiator on C2K, but he also presided over LOA 46. LOA 46 was the tear-down of the contract, workrules, payrates (34%), and all we held sacred. Whereas we still got raped in LOA 51, it mostly cost 18%, workrules were not greatly affected (unfortunately it sealed the fate on the DB plan after the mass exodus), and we obtained some compensation in terms of the Note and the Claim. LOA 46 was the 2-hour gang-rape by a group of prison inmates, and LOA 51 was more of the personal, one-on-one-slip-em-a-little-something-in-their-drink-and-play-a-little-soft-music kind of a thing. By then, we were a little numb anyway, and all lubed up.
Disgusted? So were we.
At any rate, my point is that we fared far worse under the threat of BK, than under an actual 1113 motion.
So I'm all for being able to identify people running for things, especially if I already have read their resume. This is another reason I have a real problem with this DPA stuff. There is no substance on the website, no identifying the backers.... AND we've already done been there and seen that. This is the previous administration, repackaged. Poorly.
Maybe one of the proxies can confirm this, the guys with a few posts that weren't in any other discussion about cheerleaders, but are all active right now. I also understand from my one source that this group is backing candidates in elections. I only heard about NYC, my base: PM and the other guy, the senior ER CA whose name I forget right now (JD?). So it would appear they're playing both sides of the fence. So, by now, we've seen a recall attempt, an attempt to field candidates, and an attempt to change unions.
For what?
What is the
platform? The plan? The vision?
So if JM wants to articulate some kind of vision, assuming this is anything but a personal vendetta, then by all means: express yourself. Otherwise, all this is, is a power grab, from which the Delta pilots cannot possibly benefit.
I've said before about LM that I don't want people to grow tentacles: they do their job, they move on. I think it's probably time for Lee to move on, and I'm happy that he's going for Prater's job. I think it would be good for the Delta pilots, and good for ALPA in general. It would let us focus more on our own affairs, and it would test the proposition made by this current MEC that we're a bottom-up organization (something I'm skeptical about). I also will repeat it: JM did his part well also. I think he did great in C2K, and I think he did so-so on LOA46. Still, I think he probably accurately represented the wishes of the group at the time. We all feel the sting from that period, but we don't care about the sting of internal politics felt by an individual. I still stupidly believe former Chairmen should gracefully let the following groups run the show, until the subsequent group, and then the two former Chairmen can have martinis together, while waiting for the next former Chairman.
Trying to defend our contracts is a ridiculously difficult proposition as it stands. Having people playing "Montagues and Capulets" on top is a dangerous distraction, wrapped inside a recipe for disaster.