Good question. According to the latest CQ CD, we are really QUITE impressive as a group. Maybe the CD is not involved in the award selection process?

Very well stated Sink, if the minority wishes to become the majority get out and work to influence change.

Especially when the "ex-wife" will end up getting at least 65 of that 130 hour credit leaving him with 65 hours credit on 98 hours of block!:eek:

That's actually the opposite of my point. If people are truly concerned about our actions, they should work at influencing those actions. You only need a small number to effect a resolution. If you really want to change leadership, that doesn't take 4,000 either. IOW, you don't need to be the majority to have a major impact.

But DPA never was about being the loyal opposition. IMO, it was always a power struggle, designed to usurp legitimate activism, under nebulous pretenses. Whatever red-herring might stick was used, but at the end of the day, it's very obvious the intent was to capture power (a suspicious endeavor), not effect change in actions and policies.

There is a need for more participation, more activism, to the benefit of the Delta pilots. There isn't any need to split the group over representation. Never was, really.

IMO there IS a majority of pilots that want more, and they never should have been split into people that think TC is a prophet, vs. those who think... otherwise.

If we line pilots could come up with some initiatives as transforming as say, Tactical Cost Indexes and the like, then maybe we'll start winning more awards! :D

I think my post was misinterpreted or poorly written or both. I was not talking about DPA at all, just the fact that to influence change takes an effort. We need to get involved in our existing Association and make sure our Reps hear our voice but acknowledge that the majority does rule and that's a good thing.

Because when some view our national association they see

a conflict of interest

They fail to understand our profession was built on

a coordination of interest

Caplinger's reference to Chinese abortions was a mistake. A mistake because it showed bad judgment by letting emotions take over from a dispassionate view of current facts.

Roberts' letter calling a legal organization supported by many thousands of Delta pilots a "scourge" was a similar mistake. He showed bad judgment by letting his emotions overtake him.

Carl

Whether there's a conflict of interest is not even in question Bar. You and ALPA simply argue that they are managing the conflict fairly. Some of us disagree.

The coordination of interest that built our union was one of unifying the airline pilot occupation. It never would have considered the sale of one person's job to another a "coordinated interest." It fought against the New York Air's and other alter-ego airlines of the time. Now ALPA has expressly signed on to an alter ego airline. And it did so without any member putting forth a resolution to promote alter ego airlines.

In the view of this old guy, we've come a long way from our distinguished past.

Carl

There is not just one cause (and stating that shows that there is a fundamental misunderstanding on your part)... there are MANY causes, and they need to be identified. You're a logical person, so yes, I expect you to name black and white reasons for the momentum of this movement.

I think you need to look through the FD and understand that the massive amounts of cards put in for the DPA are an indictment to the many faults that ALPA and DALPA have committed over the past few years. ALPA/DALPA needs to use this to rise up and correct, not to just pass blame.

Quit blaming those that put in cards, accept the correction, and make ALPA a better and more unified organization through this.