Originally Posted by hitimefurl

geezuz. That's my point exactly. I didn't vote on the current dpa constitution it was developed with some input but mostly by the "founders" whoever they are. The dpa constitution is in place day 1. The dpa is supposed to be an improvement over alpa. a dues increase without a vote is not an improvement regardless of the reason for funding. Who decided that in the future they know we'll need exactly .5% more dues for every section 6 and merger? The only thing you and i disagree on is the date of when it happens (because there hasn't been an election) and whether its a minimum of 2% or 2.25% both of which are higher than today not counting the last refund. Alpa has reduced dues effective next year and refunded left over money. Wasn't that a goal?

There are no block reps to sent this too to have it changed today before it goes into affect. In order to change this after a dpa vote i need to have the 25% of my entire block vote on the resolution, then have 2/3 of the executive board vote on it and then the simple majority of all pilots. All that to get rid of something that we already have protection from today! How is that an improvement? All i need today for a resolution is a simple majority at an lec meeting. There's never been an lec vote with 25% of the participants. That bar is set too high for self governance.

All dal alpa special circumstance assessments today require a vote of all the pilots. Why would you get rid of that protection? The one item that the dpa keeps scaring people over is the ability for alpa to asses pilot without a vote.

The dpa is proposing automatic dues increases every few years without a vote. Why not just make it a an assessment that we all vote on just like today?

Let's skip the misdirection of trying to talk about voting on loas, that's a different discussing. This one is about money. You really think that an automatic dues assessment of the pilots without a vote is okay? The dpa started off with saying we can lower dues because we won't need more money. Why the automatic increase for every section 6 or every merger bot of which we know will happen again in the very near future.

Originally Posted by johnso29

We have to consider all possibilities. USAPA's experience is a possibility. Don't forget about APA. It's a reality, & we have to accept it.

Originally Posted by hitimefurl

Geezuz. That's my point exactly.
blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah .

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

My man, I gotta ask...when is the last time you were right about anything on this board?

Cheerleading is not a strategy.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

Why say something in 20 words when 2000 will suffice?

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

Cheerleading is not a strategy.

Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom

Question for the moderator(s):

Some time ago (a year?) it was decided to start a DALPA vs DPA thread and posts on that subject were encouraged to be posted there. Any which showed up on the "Latest & Greatest" thread were manually moved there by the moderators.

So why are you now tolerating the DALPA vs DPA debate on the "Latest & Greatest" thread ad nauseum?

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

Why say something in 20 words when 2000 will suffice?

Originally Posted by tsquare

I still don't see your point in bringing up the number of passenger seats. Again, WhoGAS about that except that until we have a rational pay system that ignores the kind of airplanes that management buys (which are smaller than any super premium airplanes) then we as a group will continue to be paid less and less over the course of our careers. MY point is that the number of passenger seats is something we have ZERO control over so why worry about it?