Originally Posted by DAWGS (Post 899886)

This letter is a day late and a dollar short. ALPA felt the heat. That letter is nothing but damage control because other unions were making this a priority, because it was a priority to its members (something ALPA has forgotten). Even if they want to move on a national issue, there are so many layers of bureaucracy, it takes forever and their response is limp. How long did it take APA, CAPA and Sully to comment on the proposed FT/DT. I would bet it was within 24 hours. ALPA gave the usual we have to look at it. It looked almost just like their initial proposal, except ALPA proposed 9 hours. Now they say, buried in one of their blathering letters, there is no scientific evidence that 10 flight hours is safe. How long did that take, a week or two? Guess what, there is no scientific evidence 9 hours is safe, which is what ALPA proposed. Insert camel's nose. Hard to hold the line on 8 now huh? We have some of the most important regs in front of us in a generation. ALPA is not getting the job done. If they have such connections in DC, why in the he)) have we been subjected to this BS over the past 9 years?

Sailing, sometimes a slap to the face is exactly what is needed to get someones attention. Maybe if we had a union that did a little more slapping and less kissing, more would get done. Maybe if their responses were consistently "swift and certain", more would get done. What has been coming out of ALPA these days is neither consistent, swift or certain. I have no idea what side of the argument my union is going to take on any given issue. I used to think safety, since it is in their motto, was a sure bet. Not anymore.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 899895)

Am I about to agree with, what appears to be, a Dawg fan the week of a bitter game? I think I am.

:D

Originally Posted by NWA320pilot (Post 899957)

Well after reading Prater's letter I can see they were using "constructive engagement" :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 899960)

Yeah, it's not nearly as satisfying as "destructive rhetoric", but it yields better results.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 899896)

If DALPA said they no longer wanted to support ALPA National then I wonder what the support level of the funding class would be for DALPA? My bet is probably 95%?

Originally Posted by NWA320pilot (Post 899962)

That has yet to be determined.......

Originally Posted by dawgs (Post 899971)

i can assure you, these alpa guys on apc will take all the credit when something changes. It will change, but what will cause the change? Alpa's style of engagement or 2 weeks of pilots getting absolutely tired of the harassment and bs. These other independent unions work behind the scenes as well and have been on top of this issue. They just use all the tools available to apply political pressure. That includes taking a strong public position. It is a tool which should be used more often.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 899981)

What many fail to realize is that once you get the regional airlines out from underneath our financial as well as voting influence in the ALPA National structure you will have all of these regionals going after your flying. See RJET and Frontier for a warm up to how bad this will get. Look at AA and Eagle and see what happens when you have two different unions representing pilots under the same corporate structure.

There may be some ugly battles within ALPA, but at Bar states, they are dealt with "In house" and not at the table between three parties. Dump alpa and this is exactly what you will see.