Originally Posted by
80ktsClamp
Are they really facts? Shouldn't this be tested? After all, the best lawyers in the industry wrote our scope language, and they are the morons that are saying that these are "facts."
Lawyers don't give you facts.. they give you opinions.
Exactly. And forgive me if I don't completely trust the MEC's cliff notes version of the attorney's opinion. I'd like to see exactly HOW the attorneys reached the conclusion that RAH does not meet the definition of an air carrier. Come on, DALPA, show us all the details. You think we need to see great detail about the economics of our industry and our company. Let's see the same level of detail about RAH and how it relates to our scope clause.
On another note. I had a dream last night. I dreamed that I sent input to my reps months ago. That input revolved around my desire for pay restoration. I provided the reps with the same details I have previously provided here showing exactly what it would take mathematically to restore our buying power to C2K, 1986 levels for example, and what it would take mathematically to bring the pay for our domestic narrowbody pilots to equal Southwest Airlines domestic narrowbody pilots. Just factual stuff like that to give input showing where my expectations are. I wanted to know where my reps stand on this and I specifically asked for a response.
After several months of no response. I decided to email my reps and ask them why they had not responded. I received an email response back from one of my reps simply stating that they had designated another non-voting rep to respond to emails. This response still did not include any information about where my reps stand on the specific input I sent them.
After another email exchange where I asserted that this is unacceptable and that I expect my reps to be more responsive to my input, I got an email worded something like this:
"Part of the representational system we have at ALPA is to listen to all the pilots inputs and make decisions on what we hear the majority telling us. I do talk to a lot of our pilots and I agree we all would like our "profession restored and our careers back on track". The only difference is in what our "expectations" may be. Your view of "expectations" is not what I hear the majority telling me. If you want to lead that charge and create your level of "expectations" to the majority of the 12000 plus pilots we represent, we welcome the input."
Wow! What a dream... err, I mean.... nightmare! So what would you folks think if something like that happened for real?
