Originally Posted by
Jack Bauer
Well stop doing it then. I have acknowledged the good within ALPA. I keep giving them more chances and month after month but find myself even more frustrated.
Yet I still remain open minded. You on the other hand lean so heavily one way, Hell-bent on proving the ALPA way is ALWAYS the best way, your judgment appears severely clouded.
You will defend the "Mothership" to the bitter end. Instead of looking for the best answer overall and listening to what the pilots around you are saying you insist upon defending ALPA who is dropping the ball. You loose credibility in doing so. Stating that ALPA needs just a little buff work and elbow grease here and there is not an accurate depiction of the state of this union.
National reps electing Moak and the direction DALPA's top leadership seems to be headed are just more signs we should get ready to be underwhelmed in the decisions they make for us and the ensuing beat down we get from those who want to take more from us. WAKE UP! This career has already taken a severe beating. If my insurance company isn't representing me in a responsible manner then in the end they will get fired.
OK, so let me get this straight:
I have to stop looking at things the way I do in order for
you to act in a civil manner?
As for this "defending the mothership to the bitter end" nonsense, it presumes I lack judgement, and I simply don't accept it. It's particularly ironic that you ascribe open-mindedness to yourself, but deny me the benefit of the doubt in the same category.
Also, you give me far too little credit when you suggest my position is that "a little buff work and elbow grease" will do the trick. Never have I said anything of the kind. I'm not talking about Mary-Poppins-singing-a-spoonfull-of-sugar-makes-the-medicine-go-down kind of stuff. I'm talking about a true change of philosophy, in terms of MEMRAT, Chairman Elections, and true, intelligent two-way communications starting with polling where the union doesn't suppress a survey because they don't like the results, and a good, simple effective way telling us what's going on, and giving us options before things happen, not a brief afterthought narrative about what was done in a "father-knows-best" sort of way.
Still, I think ALPA does good work in general, and this MEC has served us well, but they are not connecting with the pilots. I've also previously said that I think Constructive Engagement has yielded results, but that it is always one step away from Stockholm Syndrome, ergo the reps need supervision. And since I feel that about 1/3 of union people are in there for the wrong reasons, we need to watch them closely, and cylce new people through often enough.
The main thrust of my argument, however, is that what is sorely lacking is true participation by the pilots.
That is the medicine that will cure the system. Apathy and poor communications have given maneuvering room to a group that is even more flawed than ALPA could ever be, with dubious motives, and little chance of delivering any result. As such, it is my opinion that ALPA needs to be re-directed, but not replaced.
Your metaphor WRT insurance companies is poor, because any lawyer will tell you that all insurance coverage is about the same: it's the marketing and pricing that varies. That's not true for unions. It's also poor because you presume you can simply fire one, and immediately get another that is equal or better. The only thing that has been proposed of late is clearly an inferior option. And so far, I'm trapped between people that look to be representing the establishment, and people that look to be representatives of the competition. I don't see a lot of legitimate attempts to actually reform or improve what we actually have. Or any group that will truly speak to the Delta pilots, and hear them clearly. Those are the groups I want to associate with, but where are they?