To HerkDriver: Why I am Out of ALPA
08-17-2007, 08:40 PM
#31
Nice lookin' tree, there!
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD-11, old man
Posts: 2,198
Originally Posted by rjlavender
Reason #4
ALPA's use of "Agency Shop" deprives it of two important marketing functions that would make it stronger in today's market:
First, it deprives the Association of an internal “economic feedback loop” that would signal to ALPA policy makers the true level of solidarity among members and satisfaction with union services. This, in turn, leaves ALPA with little feel for how many pilots would vigorously participate in a work action. Marketing organizations such as Sears, FedEx, and others rely heavily on economic input from customers in order to gauge their "loyalty." But not ALPA. Thus, ALPA is operating pretty much in the dark whenever it goes to the negotiating table, Wilson polls notwithstanding.
Second, Agency Shop has prevented ALPA from learning to compete effectively with either internal or outside forces. Since 1978 (Deregulation), some airline executives, including Fred Smith, have become masters at competing for customers and for getting the best deals possible for themselves from vendors, creditors, customers, and shareholders. But while these executives were acquiring their competitive skills, ALPA continued to rely on Agency Shop to retain its customers. This is why the ALPA of 2007 looks remarkably similar to the ALPA of 1978. Not much has changed. If Fred Smith continued doing business the old way, he would no longer be in it. Short version: Fred outcompetes the pilots.
One possible reason that the company agreed to the Agency Shop provision is because it knows that a single-product, take-it-or-leave-it attitude weakens the competitor that adopts it (the only people who do not seem to know this are the pilots). Also, some pilots have expressed their suspicions about the fact that the union gained Agency Shop at the same time the company gained a free hand to optimize flying. Perhaps, there is no connection, but if there were, indeed, "real enhancements" in the new contract, why did the union think that it had to keep people from leaving the fold by protecting itself with Agency Shop? At the very least, this does not look good.
When the MEC chairman made reference to the union acting like a "business" some time back, what, exactly, was he talking about? Agency Shop is the farthest thing from acting like a business that one can imagine. In my opinion, Agency Shop has been devastating to the profession and it needs to disavowed at once...not "the next time around."
ALPA's use of "Agency Shop" deprives it of two important marketing functions that would make it stronger in today's market:
First, it deprives the Association of an internal “economic feedback loop” that would signal to ALPA policy makers the true level of solidarity among members and satisfaction with union services. This, in turn, leaves ALPA with little feel for how many pilots would vigorously participate in a work action. Marketing organizations such as Sears, FedEx, and others rely heavily on economic input from customers in order to gauge their "loyalty." But not ALPA. Thus, ALPA is operating pretty much in the dark whenever it goes to the negotiating table, Wilson polls notwithstanding.
Second, Agency Shop has prevented ALPA from learning to compete effectively with either internal or outside forces. Since 1978 (Deregulation), some airline executives, including Fred Smith, have become masters at competing for customers and for getting the best deals possible for themselves from vendors, creditors, customers, and shareholders. But while these executives were acquiring their competitive skills, ALPA continued to rely on Agency Shop to retain its customers. This is why the ALPA of 2007 looks remarkably similar to the ALPA of 1978. Not much has changed. If Fred Smith continued doing business the old way, he would no longer be in it. Short version: Fred outcompetes the pilots.
One possible reason that the company agreed to the Agency Shop provision is because it knows that a single-product, take-it-or-leave-it attitude weakens the competitor that adopts it (the only people who do not seem to know this are the pilots). Also, some pilots have expressed their suspicions about the fact that the union gained Agency Shop at the same time the company gained a free hand to optimize flying. Perhaps, there is no connection, but if there were, indeed, "real enhancements" in the new contract, why did the union think that it had to keep people from leaving the fold by protecting itself with Agency Shop? At the very least, this does not look good.
When the MEC chairman made reference to the union acting like a "business" some time back, what, exactly, was he talking about? Agency Shop is the farthest thing from acting like a business that one can imagine. In my opinion, Agency Shop has been devastating to the profession and it needs to disavowed at once...not "the next time around."
fbh
08-18-2007, 04:32 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: FDX MD11 Capt in MEM
Posts: 886
Originally Posted by rjlavender
CMA,
(When you have been on strike for two years and lost 10 years of your airline career, you sometimes make up the difference elsewhere, and that is what I do).
(When you have been on strike for two years and lost 10 years of your airline career, you sometimes make up the difference elsewhere, and that is what I do).
Lavender:
You are a bald faced liar. CAL pilots went on strike 10/1/1983. You were hired at FDX in early 1990. That's not even close to ten years.
Last edited by ClutchCargo; 08-18-2007 at 04:46 AM.
08-18-2007, 05:59 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by rjlavender
Reason #4
ALPA's use of "Agency Shop" deprives it of two important marketing functions that would make it stronger in today's market:
First, it deprives the Association of an internal “economic feedback loop” that would signal to ALPA policy makers the true level of solidarity among members and satisfaction with union services. This, in turn, leaves ALPA with little feel for how many pilots would vigorously participate in a work action. Marketing organizations such as Sears, FedEx, and others rely heavily on economic input from customers in order to gauge their "loyalty." But not ALPA. Thus, ALPA is operating pretty much in the dark whenever it goes to the negotiating table, Wilson polls notwithstanding.
Second, Agency Shop has prevented ALPA from learning to compete effectively with either internal or outside forces. Since 1978 (Deregulation), some airline executives, including Fred Smith, have become masters at competing for customers and for getting the best deals possible for themselves from vendors, creditors, customers, and shareholders. But while these executives were acquiring their competitive skills, ALPA continued to rely on Agency Shop to retain its customers. This is why the ALPA of 2007 looks remarkably similar to the ALPA of 1978. Not much has changed. If Fred Smith continued doing business the old way, he would no longer be in it. Short version: Fred outcompetes the pilots.
One possible reason that the company agreed to the Agency Shop provision is because it knows that a single-product, take-it-or-leave-it attitude weakens the competitor that adopts it (the only people who do not seem to know this are the pilots). Also, some pilots have expressed their suspicions about the fact that the union gained Agency Shop at the same time the company gained a free hand to optimize flying. Perhaps, there is no connection, but if there were, indeed, "real enhancements" in the new contract, why did the union think that it had to keep people from leaving the fold by protecting itself with Agency Shop? At the very least, this does not look good.
When the MEC chairman made reference to the union acting like a "business" some time back, what, exactly, was he talking about? Agency Shop is the farthest thing from acting like a business that one can imagine. In my opinion, Agency Shop has been devastating to the profession and it needs to disavowed at once...not "the next time around."
ALPA's use of "Agency Shop" deprives it of two important marketing functions that would make it stronger in today's market:
First, it deprives the Association of an internal “economic feedback loop” that would signal to ALPA policy makers the true level of solidarity among members and satisfaction with union services. This, in turn, leaves ALPA with little feel for how many pilots would vigorously participate in a work action. Marketing organizations such as Sears, FedEx, and others rely heavily on economic input from customers in order to gauge their "loyalty." But not ALPA. Thus, ALPA is operating pretty much in the dark whenever it goes to the negotiating table, Wilson polls notwithstanding.
Second, Agency Shop has prevented ALPA from learning to compete effectively with either internal or outside forces. Since 1978 (Deregulation), some airline executives, including Fred Smith, have become masters at competing for customers and for getting the best deals possible for themselves from vendors, creditors, customers, and shareholders. But while these executives were acquiring their competitive skills, ALPA continued to rely on Agency Shop to retain its customers. This is why the ALPA of 2007 looks remarkably similar to the ALPA of 1978. Not much has changed. If Fred Smith continued doing business the old way, he would no longer be in it. Short version: Fred outcompetes the pilots.
One possible reason that the company agreed to the Agency Shop provision is because it knows that a single-product, take-it-or-leave-it attitude weakens the competitor that adopts it (the only people who do not seem to know this are the pilots). Also, some pilots have expressed their suspicions about the fact that the union gained Agency Shop at the same time the company gained a free hand to optimize flying. Perhaps, there is no connection, but if there were, indeed, "real enhancements" in the new contract, why did the union think that it had to keep people from leaving the fold by protecting itself with Agency Shop? At the very least, this does not look good.
When the MEC chairman made reference to the union acting like a "business" some time back, what, exactly, was he talking about? Agency Shop is the farthest thing from acting like a business that one can imagine. In my opinion, Agency Shop has been devastating to the profession and it needs to disavowed at once...not "the next time around."
Usually I don't reply to this stuff. But it's 2146 here in Subic, I've got Pesonality and I'm killing time before I head to the Barrio. I have one question for you. Were you a member of FPA? If not, you're not anti ALPA, you're anti UNION.
Do you know how bad things can get when you don't have a union to protect you? All you non members NOT on dues check off tick me off. You talk all this sh*t about the union, but I didn't see ANY of you returning your bonus money.
LAHAT KAYO AY BUTO.
08-18-2007, 09:34 AM
#36
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 60
to Mr. Lavendar.
You raise some interesting arguments concerning ALPA. I too, do not think that APLA is a "perfect" organization. It definitely has it's problems. I've also been a 20+ year employee of FDX (ground ops and air ops) and have witnessed gross waste and inefficiencies in the system. Yet FDX continues to make massive profits, thank God, despite itself.
Your messages intimate that ALPA is responsible (or impotent) for the downturn in the profession post 9/11. I would submit that the Bankrupcy courts, fuel costs, domestic competition, managements inability to raise ticket prices hold greater culpability in the decimation of the profession than ALPA.
My question is what constructive changes have you been able to accomplish, "verifiable", outside of ALPA?
As I said before, ALPA is not a perfect organization. However, they have secured Bob Lavendar:
1. A $20,000/yr pay raise. 10 years = > $100,000 (with colas).
2. A $18,000 retro check.
3. An increase in B fund monies.
4. Improved medical benefits for you and your dependents pre and post retirement.
5. Improved Scope Protections.
6. Disruption pay provisions.
At the end of the day, one needs to strategically evaluate whether larger improvements can be accomplished by working within the system vice against.
You raise some interesting arguments concerning ALPA. I too, do not think that APLA is a "perfect" organization. It definitely has it's problems. I've also been a 20+ year employee of FDX (ground ops and air ops) and have witnessed gross waste and inefficiencies in the system. Yet FDX continues to make massive profits, thank God, despite itself.
Your messages intimate that ALPA is responsible (or impotent) for the downturn in the profession post 9/11. I would submit that the Bankrupcy courts, fuel costs, domestic competition, managements inability to raise ticket prices hold greater culpability in the decimation of the profession than ALPA.
My question is what constructive changes have you been able to accomplish, "verifiable", outside of ALPA?
As I said before, ALPA is not a perfect organization. However, they have secured Bob Lavendar:
1. A $20,000/yr pay raise. 10 years = > $100,000 (with colas).
2. A $18,000 retro check.
3. An increase in B fund monies.
4. Improved medical benefits for you and your dependents pre and post retirement.
5. Improved Scope Protections.
6. Disruption pay provisions.
At the end of the day, one needs to strategically evaluate whether larger improvements can be accomplished by working within the system vice against.
08-18-2007, 11:58 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
We can debate what should be vs. reality all day long.
We should be able to end all wars.
Children should have health insurance.
We all know ALPA can be better. But, reality being what it is, you have a few realistic opportunities to help make it better for yourself and your fellow pilot. Being a voting member of ALPA is better and more likely to help change things for the better than being a non-member management stooge. Sending open letters and offering to give the phone number of "expert counselors" just doesn't cut it. You know that is not going to get you anywhere.
By being a non-member you helped the POS LOA pass. Thanks for your help on that one. You know you would go a lot further with the cause you claim to be proponent of if you were a member. But this really isn't about the pilot profession, is it? It's all about Lavender.
Quite frankly, you come accross as a bitter, depressed individual. You sound like you would rather be anywhere else but in the job you are in now. Perhaps it is you who could use some expert advice.
We should be able to end all wars.
Children should have health insurance.
We all know ALPA can be better. But, reality being what it is, you have a few realistic opportunities to help make it better for yourself and your fellow pilot. Being a voting member of ALPA is better and more likely to help change things for the better than being a non-member management stooge. Sending open letters and offering to give the phone number of "expert counselors" just doesn't cut it. You know that is not going to get you anywhere.
By being a non-member you helped the POS LOA pass. Thanks for your help on that one. You know you would go a lot further with the cause you claim to be proponent of if you were a member. But this really isn't about the pilot profession, is it? It's all about Lavender.
Quite frankly, you come accross as a bitter, depressed individual. You sound like you would rather be anywhere else but in the job you are in now. Perhaps it is you who could use some expert advice.
08-18-2007, 12:07 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by ClutchCargo
Lavender:
You are a bald faced liar. CAL pilots went on strike 10/1/1983. You were hired at FDX in early 1990. That's not even close to ten years.
You are a bald faced liar. CAL pilots went on strike 10/1/1983. You were hired at FDX in early 1990. That's not even close to ten years.
I was furloughed in January 1983 when Lorenzo asked ALPA to put me (and 149 of my compadres) on the street, then fly an extra three hours per month to make up for it. ALPA complied. A number of furloughed guys took that to heart and later crossed the picket line as a way of saying thanks to their "brethren" for putting them on the street. Nonetheless, I was a very active participant in the strike.
But, more to the point, in our profession we have a big problem because when we start over, we literally start at the bottom of the totem pole at new-hire wages. When you go on strike for two years, you don't lose just your income for that period. In many cases, you lose your job, your seniority, and your retirement funds as well. You lose it all. So it is not just a simple matter of calculating the dates.
If you read my article, "The Anatomy of an Irresolvable Dilemma...," you have seen how our reckless adherence to "seniority" destablizes us an a unified body under these circumstances. The article may be found at:
http://www.foundationx.com/pilot/
Apparently, you have not had the opportunity to put your family through such an affair, otherwise, you would never use such language to me. Furthermore, since the FedEx pilots have never fought even a skirmish, much less a war of the kind we fought at CAL, I think it is safe to say that everything you have at FedEx comes from the the wars that were previously fought by others, and from management benevolence. Does it not seem that FedEx is now having its way with us as it recovers its "losses" under the CBA? I was warned by a long-time PSIT member before the contract was signed that this was going to happen. He voted against it because there were "too many holes in the scheduling section."
My guess is that you are among those who want to put pilots out of a job simply because they turn 60 years of age. Some of those pilots are my friends and we walked the picket line together in order to defend the profession. Without their effort, you would be making half the salary that you are currently making. What's more, it is likely that you want to put them out simply so that you can take their jobs. This is exactly what strike breakers do and that is why ALPA, at its core, is a dog-eat-dog, scab organization. Its pilots wouldn't fight a battle to protect each other if they had to. Until things change, I choose to not take part.
It was the chest-thumpers, like yourself, who were the first to cross our picket line. We can see you coming a mile away, and your tough talk does nothing to change that.
Bob
08-18-2007, 01:04 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by Gunter
Quite frankly, you come accross as a bitter, depressed individual. You sound like you would rather be anywhere else but in the job you are in now. Perhaps it is you who could use some expert advice.
I have learned through years of experience and involvement that pilots like to ignore reality and put their heads in the sand at the first sight of conflict. What I am putting out is the reality of the situation. It is not good and we need to fix it. You and me. As I have mentioned, the LEC process does not work in these situations and, without really good, strong leadership, pure democracy becomes anarchy.
You cannot miss the fact that there was no leadership on the Age 60 or the FDA matters (and now we are playing catch-up on the optimized trips as well). There were simply announcements, and anarchy is, indeed, what we got. I practically begged the MEC to have some round table discussions on Age 60 so that we could "get out in front" of it, but they refused to do it. I believed that there were plenty of good ideas out there to make the situation palatable to all, but they were never discussed. In fact, ALPA refused to publish articles so that the crewforce could become better informed.
I don't push stuff in the cockpit but I have had plenty of conversations when certain subjects comes up. In the past few months, I have flown with two members of the PSIT. At the end of those three hour flights, both said, essentially, that they agreed with everything I said. People know that we have big problems but they don't seem to be willing to change in order to solve them.
It might help to know that I consider myself to be the most ardent "unionist" on the property. Simply paying dues means nothing. Most every pilot who crossed our picket line had been a dues-paying member. I am strike oriented. At CAL, we still had 75% out after 2years! We couldn't get that for two mintues at FedEx. Before breaking with ALPA, I did everything possible to stir the pot and bring attention to both problems and solutions. Nothing! The MEC just could not see things coming down the pike.
Having said that, I realize that everyone has a learning curve and that most MEC members have not had the profound experiences that I have had when it comes to pilot relationships under pressure. I truly admire those who serve and I take nothing away from any accomplishments that they have had, but we are failing on a strategic level and this makes it much more difficult to fix things like optimized pairings, retiree healthcare, etc..
Mind you, just as at other unions, we are losing, not gaining, leverage in our profession. The middle class is going down the drain. Organized Labor, including ALPA, had better start trying something new.
Bob
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
