Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
None of these points have anything to do with a conflict of interest. The conflict is present due to the dual representation structure we now have. As we attempt to regain the flying that we sold (I hope), we will be taking jobs from the regionals that ALPA also represents. That is the very definition of a conflict of interest. If this same scenario was happening within a legal firm, that firm would recuse itself due to the obvious conflict.
The conflict of interest does not exist, because each pilot group negotiates for itself. Unlike the Teamsters, there is no "business agent" that makes decisions on what to negotiate at the table. Local pilots make that decision, and the attorneys work for them. If DALPA wants to take back flying, they can do that. If DALPA wants to outsource more flying, they can do that as well. Either way, the choice is up to local pilots, not ALPA national. ALPA national is just the resource that you can use to accomplish the goals that your pilots set. Therefore, no conflict.
Originally Posted by
Carl Spackler
All the legal representation and economic analysis, etc comes from ALPA national...not DALPA.
How many attorneys do you have on the 8th floor dedicated solely to DALPA? I doubt you even know.
ALPA carries huge national sway over all its local divisions. But I know you know that.
Oh, how I wish that were true! I've always advocated for a more centralized union, but pilots always resist that, so we still have the autonomous MECs at each airline which ALPA National has no control over. The big brother than you imagine in your mind doesn't exist. ALPA national is a collection of resources, not an overlord.