Check Essential

I would agree with all that.
The final straw for me regarding ALPA's handling of Comair and the RJDC was this:

After JC Lawson and the Comair MEC committed their atrocity and refused to hire furloughed pilots, what did ALPA do? They made JC Lawson an Executive Vice President.

That made the ALPA National conflict of interest crystal clear.

tsquare

You must be mistaken, there is no conflict.

And....... Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

forgot to bid

Good post.

What are the numbers on the DCI fleet now btw? I count 650 with 361 CRJ200s, 70 CRJ700s, 101 CRJ900s, 68 EJets, 24 ERJ-145s and 26 SAABs. That's 239 70+ seaters?

acl65pilot

JC Lawson being a jack horse is totally separate from taking our flying against our will. No one argues that that was totally below the belt, and unacceptable. Yes, Comair is totally different, and their venom is inexcusable. It will never be forgotten, whereas ASA did the opposite, and correct thing.

The reality is ALPA does not hire pilots, but maybe it should.
They did not take our furloughed guys, but the reality is that there are plenty of groups that do not take other furloughed pilots first. MEH comes to mind, IPA's furloughed UPS pilots, APA's AMR and TWA pilots, etc. This is not a ALPA exclusive issue. I am not stating we should not do better, but if you are going to throw the mud, throw it at all the players not just one.

My opinion is ALPA should help out fellow ALPA pilots who lose their jobs, we agree on that. It is something that all pilot unions have failed at. Job fairs in a horrible market do nothing but put lipstick on a pig. When MEH was furloughing their pilots DAL, and CAL, UPS, FDX, UAL(would have been furloughed), f9, etc were hiring. No one had a preferential interviews policy set up.

acl65pilot

FtB;
You know full well that these RJ guys can talk a good game but deep down they all want to be where you are, and really do not want to see more scope sales. Scope sales start and end with each MEC. I have not fear that our current MEC Council will take any TA and send it back that sells small jet scope. They have no appetite for it.

Carl Spackler

Resources equals process. You're naive if you think the money and the experts don't play THE key role in negotiations. But since I know you're not naive, it's clear you hope to fool your fellow pilots by stating things are patently untrue. The question is, why you do this.

The ALPA president disagrees with you. He said that ALPA's highest priority in negotiations is to use ALPA's resources to ensure that contracts are not "selfish" and that contracts reflect what is best for the profession as a whole. Why do you make this stuff up? Are you used to nobody calling you on falsehoods? Do you not read what he says? Or do you just interpret it in your own special way?

Carl

FlighTimeBarbie

Why I voted NO on C2K (short version):

Scope and Scheduling concessions.

In exchange, huge pay increases, including retro pay were the obvious selling points. I, personally, believe that the retro pay became a deal breaker.

From my recollection, the MEC and Negotiating Committee, with help from ALPA National (i.e. Seth Rosen roadshows, etc.) warned that if we rejected the TA, we would lose everything and that a very poor contract would certainly be imposed on us. Personally, I found it unlikely that the TA, already agreed to by our negotiators, would be totally gutted/thrown out in favor of a grossly inferior contract – as our ALPA leadership claimed as punishment (but that is my opinion). I felt, worst case, that the already-agreed-to "TA" would be imposed – perhaps, minus the retro pay. The threats/fears were enough to affirm C2K, as they usually are, without actually striking.

While the short term loss of retro pay would have been regrettable, I was more than willing to forfeit this money to prevent the long term scope and scheduling concessions. The retro pay should have been a non-issue if pilots were truly prepared financially for a long term strike (I was ready for 6 months, in cash). Weighing six months of strike pay vs. loss of retro pay was a no-brainer (my retro paycheck was about 20k: 2 months of regular pay). Despite the tremendous activity of the Strike Preparedness Committee – I do not believe the majority of DAL pilots, who voted overwhelmingly for a strike vote – were truly ready to see it through.

Carl Spackler

This is even more unresponsive than most of your posts. What on Earth does this have to do with MEMRAT? We need to back up a bit and try this again. This is what you said in a previous post:

I responded to you by lamenting that it is indeed legal for our MEC to give scope away via an LOA before Section 6 even begins. What do you do? You completely ignore what I wrote. I understand why, because you unwittingly showed the obvious about our union's ability to do this without MEMRAT. But then to somehow conflate the issue of MEMRAT with an alleged opinion of our pilot group that we only care about pay, is absolutely incoherent.

So you know the MEC's position on that eh? ... you little dot connector you. Please post any evidence of that opinion. Perhaps some Wilson polling data? Oops can't use that...because 50% of their current questions deal with the DPA. Look forward to your evidence.

Carl

Carl Spackler

Excellent and extremely accurate post. +1

Carl

Carl Spackler

Just another example of only responding to what is comfortable for you. Care to excuse/explain this part of Check's post?:

Focus ACL, focus on what is bolded and underlined.

Carl