View Single Post
Old 03-06-2011 | 07:11 AM
  #4582  
tsquare's Avatar
tsquare
No longer cares
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Default

Originally Posted by acl65pilot
Captn;

Simple a trade unionist and a trade union should have the goal of representing the entire trade, not just part of the spectrum. If you want to call piloting a trade, then it should be the goal of the trade's union to represent all of those employed in that trade. Ergo, ALPA has tried and is continuing to try to get all pilots engaged in the trade of piloting in to ALPA.

Trust me dealing with the issues between a mainline carrier and a regional counterpart and better dealt with inside of that "trade union" than from a challenge at the table with management. I have stated this ad nausem. It is the law of unintended consequence. I much prefer the sausage making that occurs at ALPA that to deal with it at the table with the company, where we would need to go to a court of law to get it settled. You have more certainty in the current process, and as a result your exclusivity as the sole bargaining agent here at DAL is under less risk of getting challenged.

Having a bunch of independent unions that are loosely tied though CAPA is not the way to go. Look long term and look at issues like Foreign ownership. Be honest and realize that the PAC arm of ALPA is the only "trade" affiliate that has a snow balls chance of dealing with this. Implode ALPA and then standby and watch. These independents will not seem as favorable as you think they are.

Wow.. you really believe all that, don't you? Instead, now we have a bunch of independent.. (except fot the fact that they all support the fatasses in DC) unions loosely tied through alpa.. I fail to see a difference. Step back from the punch bowl a little.
Reply