Is anyone watching closely?

EVery one of the pro ALPA reps on the BOD voted against this motion. They voted to preserve a chance for to themselves to be an EVP at ALPA.... what does that tell you? What are they being promised?


MOTION: It was moved to direct the AAMNC to negotiate an amendment to the ALPA
governing documents to prohibit any AA pilot from serving as an ALPA EVP, for 15 years, who
has previously served as a Management Pilot, National Officer, member of the Board of
Directors, National Committee Chair, or member of the AAMEC and AAMNC, from the period
of November 2022 to present .. The motion was defeated 8-11-1-0.

MAKER: Gustin SECOND: Knox

FOR: Cutler, Knox, Gustin, Dick, Lokey, Scanlan, WSmith, Meyers

AGAINST: Boulanger, Ham, Lawler, BSmith, Brynjolfsson, Wilhelm, Funderburk, Henshall,
Sweep, Vasin, Mcllvenna

ABSTAIN: Wachter

ABSENT: -0-



And of course, only AFTER the merger committee told the Board that ALPA was done negotiating, they vote to move the goal posts to merge. Shady stuff

 

There should be a minimum participation level for the measure to pass.

A minimum participation level is just a more polite way of saying a non casted vote is a no vote. The measure fails is the participation fails. They are not interested in your proposal.

 

What do AA guys not want wrt ALPA membership? They use ALPA resources when it really matters (contract time). ALPA opens doors on capital hill and has the ears of lawmakers, while APA can’t get a meeting. Is it just losing independence?

 

I thinks it’s mostly just forfeiting property owned by APA. The people who have been here a long time have higher association with ownership of the APA assets.

Why does a teenager with a good job not want to vote to hire a mother to police them from themselves.

ALPA would probably be on property in seconds if APA could sell and return all assets to members and then just vote as pilots to join ALPA.

What were the Breeze and JetBlue assessments to join?

 

That seems reasonable, start with clean slate. AA dues would be enough economy of scale to still make it worth it for the ALPA collective, ROI in short order if not immediately.

Maybe hold a little back so the new MEC/LEC's have initial operating funds.

 

I don’t really understand what you’re typing.

Alpa declined to accommodate APA request of banning which members could serve their own national office?

APA options are walk away from merger because demands weren’t met, or drop demand request?

Dropping request is shady?

Maintaining the demands in order to kill a merger not shady?

I have no idea who is shady but this explanation is insufficient to determine who is.

 

Making a motion like this is laughable when he sought and accepted an IP position (pseudo-management pilot), as a sitting BOD member, even as the company refused to implement the LCP portions of the contract.

And publicly posting union communications and names? *chef's kiss*

Tells me everything I need to know about someone who's outraged by this.

Now who's shady.

 

I am not interested in caring about lazy pilots and I will vote accordingly. Mind boggling why anybody else would unless they have a hidden agenda.

 

Seems like a step in the right direction to put these two contentious issues to membership vote.

 

I mean the potential agenda is clear: against a merger with ALPA. Also hence the vote on blocking talks with a union if a merger fails for 25 years.