Originally Posted by
Splash
At what percentage does it cease to be the organization's fault that those members aren't happy? If 1% are upset, do I target them for special effort? 5%? 10% Give me a number and let's argue about it. Is there a percentage of our pilot group that is always unhappy?
You're correct that there is always a number that will choose to be disgruntled, no matter what happens. Let's say it's 10%. Yoiu can't spend inordinate resources to make them happy, especially since about 10% of us never could be happy.
But of course, that's not what I'm talking about here.
Should we call it "other-than-dissatisfied" then? You have some rubs with ALPA. So do I. Given what I know about DPA and their advisors, I have HUGE rubs with them. Maybe that's the situation across the pilot group. Maybe being 10-degrees is better than -30-degrees, but they're both freezing. I'm not that cynical, though. I think ALPA has done a very good job despite it's flaws.
No argument about DPA.
I disagree with your methodology. This isn't a local election where one Delta pilot is running against another Delta pilot. The only statistic that matters on this thread is percentage that think DPA is better than ALPA. Maybe if DPA's advisors and lawyers weren't a bunch of proven losers and management representatives, we could compare apples to apples.
If we're calling this a referendum on ALPA, I'd say the numbers speak for themselves.
You can't have it both ways, either this is just about DPA, or it isn't. If you want to look at reaction to DALPA and set aside DPA for a second, you'll see that there is a third way to this debate. It isn't about "DPA is great" vs. "DALPA is great". DPA is going nowhere, but DALPA has missed several opportunities of late. So the third way doesn't involve curling up yourself in the warm and cozy glow of achievements, but it also requires taking a hard look at failures.
What happened in the local councils,
several councils, is that the incumbents were seriously challenged or defeated. Luckily, I don't think this shot across the bow went unnoticed. You may gloss over it here if you wish, but the reps I speak with got the message. Which is only right.
I do agree that the current MEC, and the previous administration, have performed well considering the circumstances, but it doesn't matter how good the product is if your marketing sucks. The approval (and vote) of the constituents is the most basic of prerequisites for performing the work. When you run afoul of this notion, and give the impression that elections are but a trivial matter, you get replaced.