This agency shop argument is a waste of time.

The complaint, as best as I can figure, is that the young guys and gals always join so it doesn't change anything. In that case, why even bring it up? Nothing has changed for 100% of the newhires and younger pilots. Agency shop is not affecting anyone. But not having it may lead to other possibilities.


IMHO we may, at some point, start hiring more ignorant jackarses like DG who does recurrent ground school. He is a relatively young non-member and is proud of it. Who knows what kind of individual will be coming through the door in the future. Be honest, can you really predict our hiring demographic in 5 years? I don't think the risk is worth the ability to "show ALPA a lesson" by having the "power" to quit if we "need to". I think we risk going toward anarchy instead of making ALPA more responsive. Like I said before, I think ALPA is good enough if we work hard to improve it. But it will sometimes let us down.

 

Agree. Yet it is exactly this "unity" which we lack due in large part to our leadership that will not listen to its membership. This seems to be where the "lack of unity" resides at FedEx, notwithstanding the DP fliers. So, how do we regain unity here with an obstinate MEC? In a previous post, someone mentioned money as the only recourse we have.

 

And if we cnx agency shop you will resign.. Then rejoin when something you like happens. Meanwhile, that something you like that happened made some one else mad and they quit.

Everyone would become one issue non-members.....

Doesn't sound to smart to me...

 

Sometimes anarchy is the truest form of democracy. One member, one vote, one torch, one pitchfork. Like the companies we work for, if they need to be burnt down from time to time, so be it.

All I know is that market forces dictate change when consumers 'vote with their feet.' Although I fell into the contract trap like most others, the law of unintended consequences has proven that Agency Shop is an outdated, untenable concept. Sorry, but HerkDriver is spot-on with his proposal.

 

I know the original question was about agency shop.

But the real issue I think you are talking about is the difficulty in changing elected reps and the top positions in FDX ALPA when they appear to be unresponsive to member input.

 

I agree with afew posts that ALPA can do more for us if we proactively elect an MEC that will represent us. However, agency shop is giving us one small thing at the moment which we might be happy we have. That is dues money from the over 60 guys who would IMHO very limely take your seat, your quality of life and their dues money and run. It has been done before.

 

IMO if we didn't have agency shop the over 60 guys would be stuck in the back seat. DW did what he did because he knew there would be no consequences.

Oh, and it was the right thing to do... for him.

 

True it was going to happen one way or the other. Sometimes silence or a no vote regardless of the outcome is FAR better than saying "it's the right thing to do." Just as we're being polled on whether or not to endorse a candidate. I'm sure the results will be twisted so ALPA will do whatever they want - ie endorse a candidate.
There were serious issues with our FDA-LOA that the union didn't address or simply told us "its the best you'll get - take it or take it." The company has sweetened the deal since then - no thanks to the union - give credit to guys not bidding it.
There have been situations where contract enforcement has done little or nothing. Look at our accepted fares (something that doesn't affect me at all as I don't commute). Guys are getting hosed on DH tickets and the union refuses to do anything about it. There have been issues with passover pay where the union didn't look after junior members.
This isn't just a one issue deal. It's been several issues along. One captain led a recall vote for his LEC member. The vote was announced at last minute (the morning of the meeting) giving no time for people to show up. Naturally there were several that never normally attend meeting that "happened" to be at that meeting. Recall effort was voted down.

I'm not ready to say that we kick ALPA off the property - but apparently money is the only thing ALPA listens to - our vote doesn't matter.

 

I dont think the issue is the age change, so much as it is the retroactivity for those already 60+. That is what is really hurting us, and it was brought about exclusively by our MEC. Age 65 was gonna happen, true, but before DW got involved there would be no coming back to the front seat for the 200 guys who had already turned 60.

Without that retroactivity, the stagnation would be bearable, and we wouldn't be dealing with all the bid cancellations and backwards movement we are getting hit with now.

 

Yep, unfortunately, we lined up behind our leadership in unity, and in my opinion, the leadership stepped to the side.