Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
10-27-2009, 03:48 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 593
Shouldn't the guy who wrote the questions pay for their distribution?
Would candidate Nestor pay to have anyones questions distributed?
10-27-2009, 04:03 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,953
I hope I get displaced to ATL. Probably not going to happen though.
10-27-2009, 04:48 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
We vote for names and all too often nobody can associate the views of the candidate with the names, not to unlike some minute local elections when you get to the ballot box and there is no (R) or (D) next to it. You can either guess or skip so in a situation where you cannot be readily differentiated and a situation where you are trying to promote a message that you as important then I see a valid reason to send out questions and I think all of the candidates should have chosen to do it. And even if they missed the deadline they should've still done it.
As to your second and third question, say Carl decided to ask 20 questions for the candidates of 44. Why would he pay to send them out? He's trying to do his part to get the information out there for people to make informed decisions but its the candidates who'd need to flip the bill imo. And I think many of us would pay to support our candidates if given the chance.
But imo reroute I thought this was an adequate post to answer your questions:
David Nestor saw this is a good idea. He received a phone call on Sunday from one of the current reps stating exactly what you have an issue with. So here is David Nestor’s part:
David Nestor thought this was a good idea
David Nestor wrote an intra candidate e-mail stating that he thought this was a good idea
David Nestor called Publishing at ALPA National on Oct 19th to check on the legality of this. ALPA National called back stating that there was no issue with this type of document being sent.
David Nestor provided input in to the final appearance on how the final document should be sent out. His exact words were that leaving all the candidates names off of the document would allow there not to be a bias towards the ones who paid or did not pay, and the ones who sent it or who did not hit the send button. IE without political bias
He did not give final approval to National on the wording of the document nor did he give proxy to another person on what to say, how to say it, or what was said.
David Nestor was one of a few candidates that was willing to send it. He in fact did not send it and another candidate sent it to National and gave the final approval. He would have sent it as well, but did not. No one sent this document via proxy from one of the candidates, it was a direct send
National has told our LEC 44 reps (or so it has been told to DN) that DN gave final approval on the document. That is false.
Now to the good part. David Nestor takes responsibility for the fact that no names were on the document. It was his suggestion he gave to the candidates that talked about it. He told you that. He told that to the vice chair. It was not his hand that hit send.
Fact is that no malice was behind it. National was consulted by Nestor to make sure that it was not screwed up and done correctly by all of the candidates. They were aware the document was coming. No one is hiding behind a skirt on this one. No by laws were broken, even though some have said that there will be changes from this.
Fact is that as admitted to you and the vice chair, that your point and area of concern is valid, but that the accusations that Nestor and the other candidates had devious motives behind their actions is false and without merit.
Nestor took your and the vice-chairs words to heart, but not the anger behind it. If another document of this type is done and all of the participating candidates agree to have their answers shard like this one, then your concerns will be discussed about. Point is that Nestor hears your concerns and sees merit in them.
I will add to this:
Nestor as well as a few other candidates see the importance of getting a side by side comparison of the same questions. If you read them everyone that chose to answer steered around or did not steer around a given landmine. My personal opinion is that these are the questions being asked by everyone that sends e-mail to the candidates. It allows access to a lot of pilots. Candidate Nestor seem the importance in that.
He gets that your issue is not the q and a but the "deceitfulness" that you see in it being anonymous. Many of the candidates discussed how to do it. As I stated above, candidate Nestor thought that a lot of the groups/ pilots would see it politically motivated to include a message from the sender(s) when all of the candidates agreed for their answers to be shared. It was decided to not favor any candidate that way, and keep the answers to the same questions by the participating candidates as the only positions in the mailing.
Candidate Nestor saw that adding names to the e-mail as unfair to the ones that were not there. After discussions with you via PM, with the vice-chair and countless others, nothing was done incorrectly. Candidate Nestor sees your point and the merit of it, but did not intend to deceive anyone. The motivation and goals of the mailing were to have the candidates go to the pilots in the form of a q and a where they could make their decisions based on the merit of the answers each candidate provided, not the candidate that sent it, nor the candidates that paid for it.
Politics is ugly and the simple fact is that Candidate Nestor and many other that contributed to this document want the pilots to make an informed decision. Fact is that except for you and the vice chair candidate Nestor's avenues of communication have all been positive. He seeks transparency of the issues that face our union. Do not distort the facts.
David Nestor thought this was a good idea
David Nestor wrote an intra candidate e-mail stating that he thought this was a good idea
David Nestor called Publishing at ALPA National on Oct 19th to check on the legality of this. ALPA National called back stating that there was no issue with this type of document being sent.
David Nestor provided input in to the final appearance on how the final document should be sent out. His exact words were that leaving all the candidates names off of the document would allow there not to be a bias towards the ones who paid or did not pay, and the ones who sent it or who did not hit the send button. IE without political bias
He did not give final approval to National on the wording of the document nor did he give proxy to another person on what to say, how to say it, or what was said.
David Nestor was one of a few candidates that was willing to send it. He in fact did not send it and another candidate sent it to National and gave the final approval. He would have sent it as well, but did not. No one sent this document via proxy from one of the candidates, it was a direct send
National has told our LEC 44 reps (or so it has been told to DN) that DN gave final approval on the document. That is false.
Now to the good part. David Nestor takes responsibility for the fact that no names were on the document. It was his suggestion he gave to the candidates that talked about it. He told you that. He told that to the vice chair. It was not his hand that hit send.
Fact is that no malice was behind it. National was consulted by Nestor to make sure that it was not screwed up and done correctly by all of the candidates. They were aware the document was coming. No one is hiding behind a skirt on this one. No by laws were broken, even though some have said that there will be changes from this.
Fact is that as admitted to you and the vice chair, that your point and area of concern is valid, but that the accusations that Nestor and the other candidates had devious motives behind their actions is false and without merit.
Nestor took your and the vice-chairs words to heart, but not the anger behind it. If another document of this type is done and all of the participating candidates agree to have their answers shard like this one, then your concerns will be discussed about. Point is that Nestor hears your concerns and sees merit in them.
I will add to this:
Nestor as well as a few other candidates see the importance of getting a side by side comparison of the same questions. If you read them everyone that chose to answer steered around or did not steer around a given landmine. My personal opinion is that these are the questions being asked by everyone that sends e-mail to the candidates. It allows access to a lot of pilots. Candidate Nestor seem the importance in that.
He gets that your issue is not the q and a but the "deceitfulness" that you see in it being anonymous. Many of the candidates discussed how to do it. As I stated above, candidate Nestor thought that a lot of the groups/ pilots would see it politically motivated to include a message from the sender(s) when all of the candidates agreed for their answers to be shared. It was decided to not favor any candidate that way, and keep the answers to the same questions by the participating candidates as the only positions in the mailing.
Candidate Nestor saw that adding names to the e-mail as unfair to the ones that were not there. After discussions with you via PM, with the vice-chair and countless others, nothing was done incorrectly. Candidate Nestor sees your point and the merit of it, but did not intend to deceive anyone. The motivation and goals of the mailing were to have the candidates go to the pilots in the form of a q and a where they could make their decisions based on the merit of the answers each candidate provided, not the candidate that sent it, nor the candidates that paid for it.
Politics is ugly and the simple fact is that Candidate Nestor and many other that contributed to this document want the pilots to make an informed decision. Fact is that except for you and the vice chair candidate Nestor's avenues of communication have all been positive. He seeks transparency of the issues that face our union. Do not distort the facts.
10-27-2009, 04:50 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Simple, these are the questions that have been asked by almost every person that has e-mailed Dave. Why not just get this group of questions out to the group, where his, and the other candidates' answers are side by side. He does not see these as politically motivated. His desire to send these questions out was not politically motivated. It was in the purest form, to get a set of questions, though not complete nor perfect to the group.
The way it was set up, all of the candidates agreed to the blast mailing of the answers but only a few paid for it. Some did not because they say the questions as slanted. My opinion is that if they were so slanted then they should have decided not to have them published as well. Dave's take is that he did not care who paid and who did not pay, the point was to get side by side answers to a set of questions. To date no one else has wanted to do a set of questions like this, where those that had answered were willing to have them sent out to the group.
Add to that, that this set of questions has been on the DALPA forum for a few months asking for pilot input from the group. Fact is that after talking to the author about this, at least one question came from a pilot who posted it on the forum, and the original questions came from another pilot. Point is that the pilots had input in to this Q and A. It was the most complete set of questions sent to date. Dave as well as a few others felt that this along with the desire for transparency superseded any political arguments that would or could have been made.
Dave stands by the fact that most pilots see this as a positive.
[qutoe]
Would candidate Nestor pay to have anyones questions distributed?[/QUOTE]
That is a loaded question. Dave was not singularly responsible for this. He worked with many of the other candidates. He feels that transparency is important.
It has been stated that if another set of questions that sought pilot input was brought forth, and the candidates agreed to answer them, and agreed to have them published, then yes, Dave would be willing to get those answers out there to the group.
Shouldn't the guy who wrote the questions pay for their distribution?
Add to that, that this set of questions has been on the DALPA forum for a few months asking for pilot input from the group. Fact is that after talking to the author about this, at least one question came from a pilot who posted it on the forum, and the original questions came from another pilot. Point is that the pilots had input in to this Q and A. It was the most complete set of questions sent to date. Dave as well as a few others felt that this along with the desire for transparency superseded any political arguments that would or could have been made.
Dave stands by the fact that most pilots see this as a positive.
[qutoe]
Would candidate Nestor pay to have anyones questions distributed?[/QUOTE]
That is a loaded question. Dave was not singularly responsible for this. He worked with many of the other candidates. He feels that transparency is important.
It has been stated that if another set of questions that sought pilot input was brought forth, and the candidates agreed to answer them, and agreed to have them published, then yes, Dave would be willing to get those answers out there to the group.
10-27-2009, 04:53 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
In the interest of full disclosure and transparency.
Did one or more of the candidates pay for this questionaire to be distributed? If so who?
Was the pilot who asked the questions a supporter of one or more of the candidates?
I ask just to know if this really was a non partisan questionaire.
Did one or more of the candidates pay for this questionaire to be distributed? If so who?
Was the pilot who asked the questions a supporter of one or more of the candidates?
I ask just to know if this really was a non partisan questionaire.
Did it ever occur to anyone that the "author" of the questionnaire just wanted to get these answers out so that everyone could benefit from them, regardless of who he personally supports? Take the question about Lee Moak, for example. The question was, "Do you support Lee Moak and his administration? If so, why? If not, why?" Think about it for a moment. Is that a slanted or unfair question? Does it not give someone who is happy with Lee Moak and his strategies the opportunity to talk about how much they agree with him and all the things they like about his administration's strategies, just as much as it gives someone who is not happy with Lee Moak and his strategies the opportunity to talk about where they disagree with and why they may not like some or all of his strategies?
Maybe this questionnaire had nothing to do with partisanship and everything to do with getting to know the candidates better. Have you considered that possibility?
I think the "who paid for it" question is a legitimate question. I don't think it's particularly important because all of the candidates who answered agreed to have their answers shared in this manner, whether they agreed to pay for it or not. But it is a legitimate question.
Yet I still have to wonder... Why would one ask these questions on an anonymous public forum rather than just emailing all of the candidates individually and asking them? If it's really important to you to post who paid for it, then ask the candidates which ones paid for it and if it's okay to share that information here on APC. If they give you the go-ahead, then post away! (Although I still don't see where it's really relevant.) My point is that, this very indirect way of asking these questions here seems an awful lot more like partisan political grandstanding rather than honest questions. Maybe I'm missing something?
10-27-2009, 06:02 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 286
10-27-2009, 06:07 PM
Underboob King
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
Sounds like some of you ladies are getting nervous and feel the need to come attack people on an anonymous forum
Its ironic that some of these posters making the attacks are new to this forum and have only recently started posting
10-27-2009, 06:09 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
You wanted an answer and you got it from the person you thought was solely responsible. That is what you asked for, correct?
Third person or the candidate's words and not an anonymous pseudonym?
You got Dave's words which is more accountable than an anonymous board screen name.
Third person or the candidate's words and not an anonymous pseudonym?
You got Dave's words which is more accountable than an anonymous board screen name.
10-27-2009, 06:11 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 296
Look at the announced 2010 Summer Intl schedule. Not sure if they plan to create bases or DH guys to these new routes. If they create bases than 7ER's to SEA, 74's to NYC, 777's to DTW. That would create major movement since 74's and 777's are fenced. Domestically, the rumormill has been putting out taking the MD's out of SLC to Minny and moving the A-320 from Minny to SLC. Obviously more flying in NYC with the LCC swaps. Probably DC-9's to rightsize the Northeastern/Mid-Atlantic corridor. Whatever it is it will be in the co's and our best interests to get it done with one bid. Training will probably take a year to complete. Here's to chaos.
10-27-2009, 07:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
I don't have a dog in this "fight"
Seems to me, some folks are unhappy about candidates answering questions...
I for one am happy about any questionnaire with candidate answers being sent my way
and I really could care less about who does the sending and what the wording on the questions is.
If anybody (in particular a candidate) is really unhappy about the questions/answers being circulated, put out your own.
The more the better in this case, unless you have a secret agenda to push.
Cheers
George
Seems to me, some folks are unhappy about candidates answering questions...
I for one am happy about any questionnaire with candidate answers being sent my way
and I really could care less about who does the sending and what the wording on the questions is.
If anybody (in particular a candidate) is really unhappy about the questions/answers being circulated, put out your own.
The more the better in this case, unless you have a secret agenda to push.
Cheers
George
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
