Herkflyr

You might be confusing me with someone else. I voted in favor of the current contract, though it has some serious flaws. Despite the fact that we should be paid more, if I had it to do over again, I would probably vote in favor again.

I don't hold anyone's yes or no vote against them, if it is arrived at after serious consideration of all the issues. Two guys can read the same TA and come to opposing conclusions.

I just didn't get the original post's seeming conclusion that everything was ALPA's fault and that massive lawsuits and judgements were inevitable.

TheManager

Revel, not at all T.

I sincerely think this country needs meaningful tort reform.

If you bring a suit and you lose, you pay the legal costs of the party that had to defend that suit.

Thus, when pilots get upset over representational issues and sue ALPA, and they lose and the suit is deemed frivolous, you and I don't end up paying for it.

Herkflyr

I think that I misunderstood your original post. I agree with what you just posted. How I read your first post (erroneously, it seems) was that you seemed to be almost looking forward to a future lawsuit against ALPA (ala former TWA pilots blaming ALPA national for how their AA integration fared).

Rereading it, I can see how you meant otherwise. My error.

80ktsClamp

This also goes to show that the letter sent down from Moak/National and subsequently Kingsley to us that continually went after USAPA as being why an independent union is a bad idea is an illogical connection. USair ALPA would have gone down the exact same path with the exact same results had they not left ALPA- just beating their head against a wall over and over again expecting different results from trying the same thing.

FL ALPA is apparently going to try a similar path with even less successful results and never voting ALPA out (just disappearing into oblivion).

scambo1

80,
Could you expound on your logic a little? I think I agree with you, but your (personal) logic chain is just not clearly conveyed in what you wrote.

Justdoinmyjob

OK, good. It wasn't just me who didn't quite understand what he wrote.

80ktsClamp

Ha! I really wish I could blame alcohol on that, but alas no... that was just an incoherent dribble of words.

I'll try again:

1. FL ALPA is looking to end up in a string of endless lawsuits grasping at thin air just trying to grab onto something.

2. The letter that we now know that National largely dictated to Kingsley to send out (with of course some of his own scourgey word choosings) primarily went after USAPA to show why the DPA is a bad idea.

3. As is shown in the FL situation, as well as USair ALPA's actions prior to creating USAPA, being in ALPA does not change the fact that the individual unit can suck just as much as it wants to.

4. Had US-ALPA continued and not changed over to USAPA, they would continue to suck just as hard as they do today, regardless of affiliation.

5. Going after USAPA was a poor logical connect and as such largely said nothing other than drivel trying to scare people away from the DPA.

scambo1

Better.

As I have said many times in the past, I have no fear of Delta pilots going independent. We are, as a group, filled with talent. Not just "kudos, you're so talented," but real wall to wall and treetop tall talent.

The recent impeachment followed by smear campaigns have demonstrated that much of the ALPA machinations are more about personal position and power rather than the more mundane "what's best for the Delta pilots."

When this dust settles, will we be more "unified?" Will our power elite have done US a service or disservice? Is ALPA really THIS dirty? When the dust settles, will there be recalls?

We've had tons of fun, spicy, spirited back and forths in the past on APC. DALPA leaders occasionally refer to representation in military terms. From what I'm seeing right now, we have a Watergate-like abuse of power (resulting in the scourge letter and the special committee focused against dues paying members' freedoms) coupled with a misdirected attempted/ apparent cover up (NYC letter) and hamfisted attempted power grabs (CVG). I'm going to assume that the players involved selfishly believe their agenda is the "best" choice. In any case, the way this would play out in a military organization is there would be court martial proceedings and plenty of non judicial punishment. Even in a non-military organization, we should expect honor, honesty, dutiful service and a focus on the membership.

This cannot be dismissed as democracy at work. The only real sausagemaking is during contract negotiation. If the company is paying attention, I would assume the sharks are circling. I have no fear whatsoever if we change representation.

GunshipGuy

Rinse, wash, repeat.

chuck416

I wish it were different. I really do. But this ^^^^seems to sum it up pretty well. I am really tired of our contracts passing memrat with 60% or so. Memrat vote should be a no brainer for the leadership, and pass a vote of high 80th percentile or more. Hope we right our ship, no matter who represents us. But don't see a lot of reason for continuing with what we have. I am trying to remain optimistic, as there is lots of reasons to be so, with where our company is heading, financially speaking.