Letter to FedEx ALPA Comm Chair
05-10-2007, 05:09 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 137
Letter to FedEx ALPA Comm Chair
I sent the following email to Brad Mahoney on 9 May, 2007, with copies to several MEC members:
Brad,
I have read your letter to union members titled "I Am So Proud....," and I would like to contribute a few comments that I think are important:
You stated: "After much study, last year ICAO voted to adopt a new worldwide standard of age 65 for commercial airline pilots."
As you know, I have been making the case for many years that the Age 60 rule not only should but would change for two reasons, neither of which are addressed in your letter:
Reason 1: Economic. In the face of a significant increase in human longevity, "social systems" around the world can no longer remain solvent if people are not permitted the option to work longer. Canada and Germany are, for instance, raising their mandatory retirement ages (67 the case of Germany) in order to account for this increase. While some pilots have focused on their immediate financial needs (driven by pension terminations) in calling for elimination of the Age 60 rule, "economics" is one of the primary forces driving the world standard. ALPA has long been advised that a change to the Rule was inevitable and that it would be in the best interest of pilots to adapt sooner rather than later. It has had more than enough time to react, but it chose to resist.
Reason 2: Principle. The world standard is also changing because the Age 60 rule is now viewed as a totally unjustifiable act of age discrimination. The international community followed the example of the U.S. on Age 60 for many years because our country used to project the principles desired by the rest of the world. ALPA's "safety" argument was very influential. Now, it is universally recognized that ALPA's claim was a straight-out fabrication. As noted in other publications and stated publicly by John Prater, ALPA is now losing credibility with its long-time legislative supporters because of its incredible stand on Age 60.
I am struck by the fact that FedEx ALPA officials never seem to address these two strategic matters, at least, that I have seen. In fact, most arguments put out there by pilots on both sides of the issue have nothing to do with either economic or philosophical principles. They seem to only address the immediate financial interests of the person putting them forth. To me, this fits the definition of greed, and both sides are guilty.
ALPA's failure to put forth a cogent, principle-based argument has finally caught up with it, just as a lack of principle has caught up with other unions. The Labor movement lost another 360,000 members last year and union membership is now down to 7.4% of the private sector, the lowest level in recorded modern history. One reason is that people consider union leaders more corrupt and unreliable than the corrupt and unreliable executives for whom they work. In my opinion, it is time for this to change.
If I could suggest anything right now, it would be that all of us quit blaming management and others for our problems, whether it be bankruptcies, pension terminations, Age 60, or trip quality. We are to blame for not being united enough to make a stand on virtually any issue. Even at FedEx, we are essentially dependent upon management benevolence to get our way (check out trip and line quality...need I say more?). Not until we reconcile our internal differences will we be able to stop the decline. To do this we must accept responsibility for our actions and develop a set of principles under which to operate. Those principles must be backed up by financial incentives that unite rather than divide us. Here are three requirements:
1. The "seniority system" can no longer be used to justify wide ranges in compensation and working conditions among similarly-skilled pilots. Such differentials create too much competition among pilots for the "senior" positions. This is why the junior pilots want the senior pilots out at age 60, no doubt about it, and it creates other such havoc among us as well. We need a new paradigm--a new system--to ensure that everyone feels fairly treated and their talents appreciated. The goal must be that everyone flies decent trips, not just the senior pilots. Otherwise, we will all be flying indecent trips. This change needs to happen yesterday.
2. Agency Shop, as we know it, must go. Once touted as a "union security" policy that protected unions against "freeloaders," Agency Shop is now viewed as a "job protection plan" that shields less than competent union officials from accountability. Not until there is an effective "economic feedback loop" wherein union members can truly vote with their feet and pocketbooks will leadership improve to the point of being able to compete with capable corporate executives. If you want good participation and solidarity, you must provide a good product. We have a very defective product--we are dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself profession (not just ALPA) in which no principle-based leadership or followership has been cultivated.
3. The LEC system of "leadership" must be discarded. Currently, all initiative for change must start at the LEC level, regardless of the complexity of the matter. This makes the rank and file responsible for most decisions. This would be similar to executives at Toyota sitting around a table waiting for the assembly line workers to come up with a global tax policy. Realistically, strategic thinking does not occur at that level. ALPA must create an office of strategic thinking and planning where complex decisions are made on the basis of pre-determined principles, then presented intelligently to the rank-and-file.
In my opinion, until changes such as these are acknowledged as necessary, ALPA will continue to damage our profession and not be worthy of membership. If FedEx ALPA officials continue to ignore advice simply because it comes from non-members, it will be a continuation of the union-only "mentality" that has driven Labor into near submission. No rational organization ignores good, principled advice from qualified people, regardless of their state of affiliation.
As you also know, prior to resigning from ALPA, I made technical suggestions on how to change Age 60 while, at the same time, minimizing or, even, eliminating the negative impact on "junior" pilots. I never heard a word back from FedEx ALPA on this. Fortunately, some officials at the national level are now listening so there is a small glimmer of hope, but it is very small at this point. If you are interested in pondering solutions to our strategic problems, I suggest that you re-read my article, "Learning to Compete Wisely, a Primer in Creating Natural Unity." I have attached a copy for your review along with one other tactical document.
By the way, Age 60 is not a strategic problem. It is a symptom of a strategic problem. ALPA has far greater things to worry about than Age 60.
Sincerely,
Bob
Bob Lavender
attachments: "Learning to Compete Wisely...." and "The Anatomy of an Irresolvable Dilemma"
Brad,
I have read your letter to union members titled "I Am So Proud....," and I would like to contribute a few comments that I think are important:
You stated: "After much study, last year ICAO voted to adopt a new worldwide standard of age 65 for commercial airline pilots."
As you know, I have been making the case for many years that the Age 60 rule not only should but would change for two reasons, neither of which are addressed in your letter:
Reason 1: Economic. In the face of a significant increase in human longevity, "social systems" around the world can no longer remain solvent if people are not permitted the option to work longer. Canada and Germany are, for instance, raising their mandatory retirement ages (67 the case of Germany) in order to account for this increase. While some pilots have focused on their immediate financial needs (driven by pension terminations) in calling for elimination of the Age 60 rule, "economics" is one of the primary forces driving the world standard. ALPA has long been advised that a change to the Rule was inevitable and that it would be in the best interest of pilots to adapt sooner rather than later. It has had more than enough time to react, but it chose to resist.
Reason 2: Principle. The world standard is also changing because the Age 60 rule is now viewed as a totally unjustifiable act of age discrimination. The international community followed the example of the U.S. on Age 60 for many years because our country used to project the principles desired by the rest of the world. ALPA's "safety" argument was very influential. Now, it is universally recognized that ALPA's claim was a straight-out fabrication. As noted in other publications and stated publicly by John Prater, ALPA is now losing credibility with its long-time legislative supporters because of its incredible stand on Age 60.
I am struck by the fact that FedEx ALPA officials never seem to address these two strategic matters, at least, that I have seen. In fact, most arguments put out there by pilots on both sides of the issue have nothing to do with either economic or philosophical principles. They seem to only address the immediate financial interests of the person putting them forth. To me, this fits the definition of greed, and both sides are guilty.
ALPA's failure to put forth a cogent, principle-based argument has finally caught up with it, just as a lack of principle has caught up with other unions. The Labor movement lost another 360,000 members last year and union membership is now down to 7.4% of the private sector, the lowest level in recorded modern history. One reason is that people consider union leaders more corrupt and unreliable than the corrupt and unreliable executives for whom they work. In my opinion, it is time for this to change.
If I could suggest anything right now, it would be that all of us quit blaming management and others for our problems, whether it be bankruptcies, pension terminations, Age 60, or trip quality. We are to blame for not being united enough to make a stand on virtually any issue. Even at FedEx, we are essentially dependent upon management benevolence to get our way (check out trip and line quality...need I say more?). Not until we reconcile our internal differences will we be able to stop the decline. To do this we must accept responsibility for our actions and develop a set of principles under which to operate. Those principles must be backed up by financial incentives that unite rather than divide us. Here are three requirements:
1. The "seniority system" can no longer be used to justify wide ranges in compensation and working conditions among similarly-skilled pilots. Such differentials create too much competition among pilots for the "senior" positions. This is why the junior pilots want the senior pilots out at age 60, no doubt about it, and it creates other such havoc among us as well. We need a new paradigm--a new system--to ensure that everyone feels fairly treated and their talents appreciated. The goal must be that everyone flies decent trips, not just the senior pilots. Otherwise, we will all be flying indecent trips. This change needs to happen yesterday.
2. Agency Shop, as we know it, must go. Once touted as a "union security" policy that protected unions against "freeloaders," Agency Shop is now viewed as a "job protection plan" that shields less than competent union officials from accountability. Not until there is an effective "economic feedback loop" wherein union members can truly vote with their feet and pocketbooks will leadership improve to the point of being able to compete with capable corporate executives. If you want good participation and solidarity, you must provide a good product. We have a very defective product--we are dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself profession (not just ALPA) in which no principle-based leadership or followership has been cultivated.
3. The LEC system of "leadership" must be discarded. Currently, all initiative for change must start at the LEC level, regardless of the complexity of the matter. This makes the rank and file responsible for most decisions. This would be similar to executives at Toyota sitting around a table waiting for the assembly line workers to come up with a global tax policy. Realistically, strategic thinking does not occur at that level. ALPA must create an office of strategic thinking and planning where complex decisions are made on the basis of pre-determined principles, then presented intelligently to the rank-and-file.
In my opinion, until changes such as these are acknowledged as necessary, ALPA will continue to damage our profession and not be worthy of membership. If FedEx ALPA officials continue to ignore advice simply because it comes from non-members, it will be a continuation of the union-only "mentality" that has driven Labor into near submission. No rational organization ignores good, principled advice from qualified people, regardless of their state of affiliation.
As you also know, prior to resigning from ALPA, I made technical suggestions on how to change Age 60 while, at the same time, minimizing or, even, eliminating the negative impact on "junior" pilots. I never heard a word back from FedEx ALPA on this. Fortunately, some officials at the national level are now listening so there is a small glimmer of hope, but it is very small at this point. If you are interested in pondering solutions to our strategic problems, I suggest that you re-read my article, "Learning to Compete Wisely, a Primer in Creating Natural Unity." I have attached a copy for your review along with one other tactical document.
By the way, Age 60 is not a strategic problem. It is a symptom of a strategic problem. ALPA has far greater things to worry about than Age 60.
Sincerely,
Bob
Bob Lavender
attachments: "Learning to Compete Wisely...." and "The Anatomy of an Irresolvable Dilemma"
05-10-2007, 05:32 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: FDX A300 CPT
Posts: 967
Bob....posts like this just add fuel to the fire...how about joining YOUR union and then someone might give a crap about your opinion...until then keep pouring my coffee
Last edited by CaptainMark; 05-10-2007 at 05:42 PM.
05-10-2007, 05:50 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777 Capt
Posts: 403
Quite frankly rjlavender, until you step up and join the union, and start pulling your own weight, you're a non-entity in this discussion within ALPA. What makes you think any of our union officials give a rats a** what you think when you aren't willing to financially contribute to our cause?
Join the union, and pay your back dues! When you do we will be more than willing to listen to your input. If there's some bizarre reason that prevents you from joining ALPA, then why don't you send a certified check to the charity of your choice that equals all of the pay and benefits improvements that the FPA and ALPA have gotten on your behalf, and send a copy of that to Brad Mahoney. At least that might give you some moral footing to stand on to make your opinion heard.
Until then, you're just a cheap bum who's leaching off the rest of us, and soaking up tens of thousands of dollars in pay and benefits that you didn't help earn and don't deserve.
Join the union, and pay your back dues! When you do we will be more than willing to listen to your input. If there's some bizarre reason that prevents you from joining ALPA, then why don't you send a certified check to the charity of your choice that equals all of the pay and benefits improvements that the FPA and ALPA have gotten on your behalf, and send a copy of that to Brad Mahoney. At least that might give you some moral footing to stand on to make your opinion heard.
Until then, you're just a cheap bum who's leaching off the rest of us, and soaking up tens of thousands of dollars in pay and benefits that you didn't help earn and don't deserve.
05-10-2007, 05:51 PM
#6
...Whatever It Is!
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by rjlavender
I sent the following email to Brad Mahoney on 9 May, 2007, with copies to several MEC members:
I wonder how short of a time it took to make it from his inbox to his recycle bin!
05-10-2007, 06:08 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,336
Not enough
Bob,
Are you under the mistaken impression that your superior intellect is so far above any of us dues paying members that ALPA would be so grateful to be graced with your opinion that it would prefer your sage words to the talent of it's own membership?
Do you honestly believe that the unsolicited offer of your opinion is just compensation for years of dues and active participation in our process?
Don't you think there are folks in the Union that are smart and talented, or do you just believe only you were specifically endowed by the Creator with special insight that all others should listen to with a perked ear like they would to E.F. Hutton?
For the record, I don't even read your stuff. I just see that's long, boring, and written by you....then I ignore it. If you happen to have an opinion that strikes any similarity to reality, then I just chalk it up to coincidence.
Bob, you aren't the visionary with sage perspective that you fancy yourself. As far as I'm concerned, you're a third rate hack and master of the obvious, whose boorish behavior is only exceeded by your parsimony.
Ever read Don Quixote? It's frustrating that you are the only one to recognize your brilliance....isn't it. I suggest if you are going to joust windmills, you do so where you won't be seen and laughed at. No matter how accurate your dartboard may be. No one will ever take you seriously.
Are you under the mistaken impression that your superior intellect is so far above any of us dues paying members that ALPA would be so grateful to be graced with your opinion that it would prefer your sage words to the talent of it's own membership?
Do you honestly believe that the unsolicited offer of your opinion is just compensation for years of dues and active participation in our process?
Don't you think there are folks in the Union that are smart and talented, or do you just believe only you were specifically endowed by the Creator with special insight that all others should listen to with a perked ear like they would to E.F. Hutton?
For the record, I don't even read your stuff. I just see that's long, boring, and written by you....then I ignore it. If you happen to have an opinion that strikes any similarity to reality, then I just chalk it up to coincidence.
Bob, you aren't the visionary with sage perspective that you fancy yourself. As far as I'm concerned, you're a third rate hack and master of the obvious, whose boorish behavior is only exceeded by your parsimony.
Ever read Don Quixote? It's frustrating that you are the only one to recognize your brilliance....isn't it. I suggest if you are going to joust windmills, you do so where you won't be seen and laughed at. No matter how accurate your dartboard may be. No one will ever take you seriously.
Last edited by Laughing_Jakal; 05-10-2007 at 06:11 PM. Reason: I was ranting like Lavender
05-10-2007, 09:12 PM
#9
Slainge Var'
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
Posts: 1,530
1. The "seniority system" can no longer be used to justify wide ranges in compensation and working conditions among similarly-skilled pilots.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't you advocate a flat pay scale with all pilots, in all seats, in all aircraft types, earning the same pay? If my memory is wrong, what was it you were advocating relative to the seniority system?
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't you advocate a flat pay scale with all pilots, in all seats, in all aircraft types, earning the same pay? If my memory is wrong, what was it you were advocating relative to the seniority system?
05-11-2007, 01:40 AM
#10
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by rjlavender
Reason 1: Economic. In the face of a significant increase in human longevity, "social systems" around the world can no longer remain solvent if people are not permitted the option to work longer. Canada and Germany are, for instance, raising their mandatory retirement ages (67 the case of Germany) in order to account for this increase."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
