Unhappy with FDX ALPA/ALPA NAtional.....what to do?
 

I, for one, am increibly disappointed in both Fedex ALPA and ALPA National. As much as I've tried to be an ALPA team player; I honestly believe they have BOTH abandoned me. FDX ALPA because they are clearly out of touch with their respective membership(Age 65 "poll", FDA LOAs, VEBA) and ALPA National because they clearly don't care what "joe average Fedex pilot" is concerned with(staunchly supporting Age 65 law change).
The question I have is this...aside from hoping Albie, Vic and Tony C spearhead a revival in Fedex ALPA that truly believes in representing the MAJORITY of FDX pilots, what do we do to try to make sure we are represented by those we pay good money to represent us?
We can't quit(closed shop and we NEED a solid Union) and we can't wait for the old guard of DW and his cronies to finally understand that they have lost the trust and confidence of their membership.
Would a letter writing campaign make sense to anybody? I mean, does anybody think the dictators of Fedex ALPA would pay attention if they received a letter signed by a double digit percentage of their populous that basically said they no longer had our confidence that they truly represented their constituents? How do we do this so that it builds fraternity, communicates our concerns while still letting management know that somehow, in some way, my negotiating committee speaks for me???
I honestly don't know but status quo from FDX ALPA or ALPA National has proven NOT to represent my best interests.

I am with you ham but I don't think that letter writing will work. I am willing to give it a try, but I have gone and talked one on one with many in our leadership group and they think we are the ones that are off target. I believe that change must come by changing the LEC's and then elect a new MEC. Now back to my breathing exercise, deep breath...

I agree with part of what you say. FedEx ALPA really screwed the pooch on the FDA LOA. They didn't consult with the pilot group before hand, did a laughable job at negotiating, and failed miserably at keeping us in the loop throughout the process. That needs to change.
I disagree with you on your age 65 stance. People need to take off the blinders and realize it wouldn't have made any difference in the outcome if ALPA had fought the change. It would have only drained resources and made us look that much more ineffectual when we came out of the debate on the losing side. There is no way Congress is going to allow foreigners to operate in our airspace system and carry US citizens and then deny that right to US pilots. It would have been decided in the courts and in the end it would have the exact same effect. I'm glad ALPA knows when not to beat their heads against a brick wall.

I think that statement says volumes, and other posts have addressed it. It's water under the bridge now, but a "root cause analysis" might point to the genesis of this as our country not choosing to enforce its own rules and regulations (CRAR for you LIDO fans). I honestly don't remember hearing any type of warning shot from ALPA when ICAO changed their age and the US choose not to enforce its own age regulation on other carriers operating in its sovereign airspace. Anyone recall anything from them?

From ICAO Document 7300, rev. 7, Article V:


I wonder - were open sky discussion/negotiations occurring at that time?

Oh well, as I said, water under the bridge now. Just sit back, pop another, and watch the ICAO ice flow (cabotage, foreign ownership, foreign-pilot manned domiciles, etc.) come down the river. Hmmm, think I'll move to the shore, not sure the bridge is going to survive what's coming.

(1) Yes, and

(2) I wonder if there are Chinese and French pilots complaining about us coming in and setting up domiciles on their turf, manned by us foreigners?
:confused:

I'm ready to do whatever it takes to remove the FDX MEC leadership and help get more people like Albie, Vic and Tony into office. Just show me the way...SG

Hamfisted, If the MEC is so out to lunch, why did 68% vote to back them on the LOA for the Foreign Domicile? I agree with everything you say. But you've got to put some blame on our rank and file for being apathetic. I blame them for letting our union get away with it.

Baron,

While I am upset with ALPA for reversing its Age 60 stance, I am particularly ****ed off at FDX ALPA for ensuring the ROPES move back to the left seat. We were the ones that made sure that the verbiage was added to legislation. While there might be some stagnation with an age change, at least most pilots won't effectively lose seniority.

Hog,

I think that the MEC is out to lunch, but their constant barrage of Vote for the LOA (you can even change your vote) emails woke up even the most apathetic member. I think they scared people into voting for the LOA. Once you have the largest voice, you have power. The small group on APC just doesn't have that kind of impact, and sometimes it is unfortunate because this group generally stays well informed.

What would be easier, recall the MEC or switch to an independent union. I was a big proponent of the switch from FPA to ALPA. Now I am having buyers remorse.

As far as age 60, NW pilots opposed the change. From what I remember FEDEX ALPA (Dave Webb) was one of the only guys who was after retroactivity. He was also totally out to lunch and ignorant on the FDA LOA issue. An old rallying cry around here making fun of old purple guys was: "I got mine pull up the ladder". It seems to me that saying applies to some of our ALPA leadership.

Baron,

I think the loss of trust comes from our leadership not having the stones to tell alpa national that we were against the age change, like the majority of us said. THAT was the rub. We all knew the age was going to change, and yes we wanted to be a part of it, but I thought that a majority representation was supposed to be just that...if we vote no, then they are supposed to vote no. How can you place your trust in an organization that doesn't represent their people the way they are supposed to? Then the LOA garbage was to follow.

2 more cents...