Aren't you a member?

Isn't this "our" club?

... and we might all be making an erroneous assumption that ALPA is defending this person. ALPA may stop at simply being responsive to discovery that it had to respond to.

Now the problem is ALPA may have turned over documentation which was more properly "work product" and protected by attorney - client privilege.

IMHO we should do more to protect "our beloved club." We need a strong union to achieve our goals and protect our jobs. Way too often we throw our association under the bus, getting in trouble collectively rather than making the difficult choices. ALPA takes a lot of heat ... defending pilots.

 

I'm a let the chips fall where they may kind of guy. However, in fairness, and with significant distance from the DPA, this last DALPA posting on the "hacking" topic is a pretty far cry from what has come out in the past.

 

Okay, fair enough. Thanks for your honesty.

You said that the letter is scripted and used an odd choice of words. I agree.

Would it matter to you if those "private writings and thoughts of a personal nature" actually WERE the anti-DPA information that was published on DPA's website?

And would it matter to you (and only time will tell if this is the case), if Mr. Private Writings turns out to be an ALPA insider?

Would either of those change your opinion as to how high this thing stinks?

 

Of course I am, but it's been a long time since ALPA has even remotely represented me. And I'm not alone in thinking that.

You advocated in an earlier post that members of DPA should be expelled and that they don't "deserve the privilege of membership." Way to build that "unity" Bar. "Unity" is merely a false rallying cry to fall in line with whatever the chairman says.


While it may be your "club" it's not mine. It's supposed to be a union. Until our "leadership" stops going to management birthday parties, watching baseball games with the CEO, and having our national "club" president going on a wall street interview tour telling investors our "contracts are mature" and that ALPA's contract demands won't prove onerous to airlines, we are going to get more of the same.

 

How does that matter, if the guy (gal, or it) was acting completely on their own?

It boils down to harm. There was none. If anything this was a fundraising windfall and gave the DPA a lot more to talk about than their Crew Van News from before the incident took place:

QUOTE = DPA
"Tentative Agreement Voting Opens Today!

Perhaps you woke up this morning and grabbed the USA Today. You may have noticed an article describing the horrors occurring right now in China where government officials dragged a woman out of her home, covered her head, beat her and then carried her to a hospital where they forced an abortion on her, killing her 7 month old unborn child....all for not paying a $6,300 fine for having a second child! The citizens of China and the world are outraged by the actions of a governing body that would trample on its citizens.

[COLOR=#333333]ALPA has trampled on you by ignoring your survey inputs. When Reps are asked about the Contract Survey results, they declare the survey was merely "aspirational" in nature."[/quote]

If this was an "insider" out to harm the DPA, they failed. In fact they aided the DPA, helped it, funded it and sustained it.

 

How do you know that is accurate? Because DALPA says so?

I'm not sure what Check Essential means by "any connection to DALPA", it seems pretty broad.

Are you saying that Mr. Private Writings does not now hold, or hold at the time of the "hacking," any ALPA office, whether appointed or elected? Or that Mr. Private Writings was an "ALPA Volunteer" in any capacity at the time his "thoughts of a personal nature" were "intermingling" with DPA's website?

 

Then get involved and make a difference.

We can not enjoy the unity of brothers who do not wish to be ALPA members. When they step over the line of seeking to harm ALPA and harm other ALPA members, then we have a duty to protect our association and members. It is not about retribution, not at all. We always seek the restoration of members, but, it is ridiculous to have a member who is actively seeking the decertification of the association and trying to create liabilities for which the association and it's membership will be asked to pay.

Those who have left and those who have been expelled have generally wanted back in and been much better members afterwards. I have yet to vote on a membership resolution, except to welcome members back into our union. That member then went on to be a very productive volunteer who helped a lot of other pilots.

 

You can't be serious Bar. There is a HUGE difference if this was done by someone high up at the ALPA trough. It makes all the difference in the world.

If it turns out to be just joe pilot, that's one thing, if it turns out to be an administration official, a rep, a committee member, a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STORY.

There is no "acting completely on your own" at that level. It's an institutional problem at that point. ALPA acts through its officials and appointees.

 

Well said Essential. You really have to jump through quite a few hoops to believe the "explanation" that's been put out.

In fact, believing the tale that's been told requires a lot of faith, while ignoring a lot of facts that just don't make any sense whatsoever.

 

Can you give some example of federal offenses that a pilot could commit that were "directly related to his employment"? Certainly there are drug/alcohol offenses that may fit into that category, but do you think hacking a fellow pilot's website has ANYTHING TO DO with the purported offender's services to his/her employer?