Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-27-2011, 07:05 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by tsquare
Of course you check it often. With over 14,000 posts to your credit, that is painfully obvious. The problem I have with such a quick response is that it highlights your intense desire to maintain the status quo regardless of whether or not there might be a better idea out there. I could be all wet in this idea, I dunno, but your lightning fast response is endemic of the same ones that I would expect from the union. Because we have always done something a particular way, that must mean that is the best way for it to be done. That is so much bullsqueeze.
You want it done right. Well duuuuuh, I do too. But what I do know is that with NYC and DTW being over 80% commuters, the base interest structure has a big weakness because the majority of those commuters are not involved so their interests are rarely heard. Franky, I think yours is a weak argument for the status quo, because of the lack of participation at the aforementioned bases. You want more people involved, all you have offered me is more study, and more roadblocks. Just like crewpass.... (couldn't resist that one)
Block representation would do away with homerism. It would be a more accurate representation of pilots from across the entire group. Perhaps a two house government would be appropriate, similar to a house/senate structure. Bases are the senate, and deal with base specific issues, and geographical LECs are the house where more voices get heard. Think outside the box for once.
What we have now is a relative vocal minority at the largest bases tend to get their issues heard directly by their representatives. Point is, I am not going to get on an airplane and fly to NY to attend an LEC meeting for the usual dry meaningless meetings that occur. I have been to some, and it is a waste of my day off. (Standing by for the usual retort to this)
You want it done right. Well duuuuuh, I do too. But what I do know is that with NYC and DTW being over 80% commuters, the base interest structure has a big weakness because the majority of those commuters are not involved so their interests are rarely heard. Franky, I think yours is a weak argument for the status quo, because of the lack of participation at the aforementioned bases. You want more people involved, all you have offered me is more study, and more roadblocks. Just like crewpass.... (couldn't resist that one)
Block representation would do away with homerism. It would be a more accurate representation of pilots from across the entire group. Perhaps a two house government would be appropriate, similar to a house/senate structure. Bases are the senate, and deal with base specific issues, and geographical LECs are the house where more voices get heard. Think outside the box for once.
What we have now is a relative vocal minority at the largest bases tend to get their issues heard directly by their representatives. Point is, I am not going to get on an airplane and fly to NY to attend an LEC meeting for the usual dry meaningless meetings that occur. I have been to some, and it is a waste of my day off. (Standing by for the usual retort to this)
07-27-2011, 07:14 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: maddoggy dog
Posts: 1,026
Originally Posted by tsquare
Of course you check it often. With over 14,000 posts to your credit, that is painfully obvious. The problem I have with such a quick response is that it highlights your intense desire to maintain the status quo regardless of whether or not there might be a better idea out there. I could be all wet in this idea, I dunno, but your lightning fast response is endemic of the same ones that I would expect from the union. Because we have always done something a particular way, that must mean that is the best way for it to be done. That is so much bullsqueeze.
You want it done right. Well duuuuuh, I do too. But what I do know is that with NYC and DTW being over 80% commuters, the base interest structure has a big weakness because the majority of those commuters are not involved so their interests are rarely heard. Franky, I think yours is a weak argument for the status quo, because of the lack of participation at the aforementioned bases. You want more people involved, all you have offered me is more study, and more roadblocks. Just like crewpass.... (couldn't resist that one)
Block representation would do away with homerism. It would be a more accurate representation of pilots from across the entire group. Perhaps a two house government would be appropriate, similar to a house/senate structure. Bases are the senate, and deal with base specific issues, and geographical LECs are the house where more voices get heard. Think outside the box for once.
What we have now is a relative vocal minority at the largest bases tend to get their issues heard directly by their representatives. Point is, I am not going to get on an airplane and fly to NY to attend an LEC meeting for the usual dry meaningless meetings that occur. I have been to some, and it is a waste of my day off. (Standing by for the usual retort to this)
You want it done right. Well duuuuuh, I do too. But what I do know is that with NYC and DTW being over 80% commuters, the base interest structure has a big weakness because the majority of those commuters are not involved so their interests are rarely heard. Franky, I think yours is a weak argument for the status quo, because of the lack of participation at the aforementioned bases. You want more people involved, all you have offered me is more study, and more roadblocks. Just like crewpass.... (couldn't resist that one)
Block representation would do away with homerism. It would be a more accurate representation of pilots from across the entire group. Perhaps a two house government would be appropriate, similar to a house/senate structure. Bases are the senate, and deal with base specific issues, and geographical LECs are the house where more voices get heard. Think outside the box for once.
What we have now is a relative vocal minority at the largest bases tend to get their issues heard directly by their representatives. Point is, I am not going to get on an airplane and fly to NY to attend an LEC meeting for the usual dry meaningless meetings that occur. I have been to some, and it is a waste of my day off. (Standing by for the usual retort to this)
T - I think you may have overreacted to ACL. I've been to a few meetings and have seen acl there as well. He is an active member trying to get things done for our group. I've seen him submit resolutions. Some pass, some fail. He uses a lot of his free time to research a subject and then comment on it here. Just because he has a quick answer doesn't make it wrong...or right. Maybe he has done the research and actually has some knowledge about the subject. I don't have any knowledge about any of this stuff. I am learning though. If we want something changed we unfortunately have to use the framework of our bloated union.
BTW, I have sent a DPA card in. I also believe changing our union so close to openers is a bad idea. If we get to the end of the year and DPA still does not have enough cards I would love for DPA to have a huge campaign to support our current structure through the contract talks and then come out swinging afterwards. We ask Dalpa to say and do the right thing, why not ask DPA to step up as well? What I mean by this is that there may be a time to step away from a divide and try to join forces for the greater good. Make sense?
07-27-2011, 07:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,846
Originally Posted by hoserpilot
BTW, I have sent a DPA card in. I also believe changing our union so close to openers is a bad idea. If we get to the end of the year and DPA still does not have enough cards I would love for DPA to have a huge campaign to support our current structure through the contract talks and then come out swinging afterwards. We ask Dalpa to say and do the right thing, why not ask DPA to step up as well? What I mean by this is that there may be a time to step away from a divide and try to join forces for the greater good. Make sense?
My biggest problem with the DPA is that if they have the numbers and the support they say they do, then they should be able to rickroll practically ANY of the LECs with their own people.
Nu
07-27-2011, 07:31 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by hoserpilot
T - I think you may have overreacted to ACL. I've been to a few meetings and have seen acl there as well. He is an active member trying to get things done for our group. I've seen him submit resolutions. Some pass, some fail. He uses a lot of his free time to research a subject and then comment on it here. Just because he has a quick answer doesn't make it wrong...or right. Maybe he has done the research and actually has some knowledge about the subject. I don't have any knowledge about any of this stuff. I am learning though. If we want something changed we unfortunately have to use the framework of our bloated union.
BTW, I have sent a DPA card in. I also believe changing our union so close to openers is a bad idea. If we get to the end of the year and DPA still does not have enough cards I would love for DPA to have a huge campaign to support our current structure through the contract talks and then come out swinging afterwards. We ask Dalpa to say and do the right thing, why not ask DPA to step up as well? What I mean by this is that there may be a time to step away from a divide and try to join forces for the greater good. Make sense?
BTW, I have sent a DPA card in. I also believe changing our union so close to openers is a bad idea. If we get to the end of the year and DPA still does not have enough cards I would love for DPA to have a huge campaign to support our current structure through the contract talks and then come out swinging afterwards. We ask Dalpa to say and do the right thing, why not ask DPA to step up as well? What I mean by this is that there may be a time to step away from a divide and try to join forces for the greater good. Make sense?
That makes a ton of sense. We have to be successful going though this section 6. All of our families depend on us getting a good contract.
I do thank you for the kind words, and you are correct. I am invested in this career and the success of this pilot group. I want to see hour union evolve and move forward. I want the pilots that are so fed up with the process to step up. It is not easy, but it has to be done to carry this profession forward.
I have seen you too at the LEC meetings. It is important to show up. We are seeing about 35 pilots per meeting. The 44 chair is trying to get the word out about the meetings prior to the bidding for that months schedule. It really is imperative to take three or four hours out of our day every three months to show up. When pilots show up, they can force the change they want. They cannot do it from home.
07-27-2011, 07:37 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Still in one
Posts: 784
Originally Posted by johnso29
Honestly, if they knew about it I really don't think they'd be able to tell you anyway. Pesky non disclosure agreements. 
07-27-2011, 07:43 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
It really is imperative to take three or four hours out of our day every three months to show up. When pilots show up, they can force the change they want. They cannot do it from home.
07-27-2011, 07:45 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
You ideas make sense on many levels, I suggest talking to your LEC Reps, and see if they can present a Resolution at the BOD in DC next month.
Yeah, like that'll ever happen... but OK.. I'll write something up. I wasted a few hundred hours on a LGBP proposal, so why not this too...
07-27-2011, 07:51 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by tsquare
Yeah, like that'll ever happen... but OK.. I'll write something up. I wasted a few hundred hours on a LGBP proposal, so why not this too...
I also "get" what you are getting at, but I am also telling you that, just because you "think/demand" it, does not mean the rest of your peers feel the same way. It takes a heck of a lot of work to get the changes you are seeking. Most do not want to put the work in, they just want others to do their bidding. That in effect is why we are where we are in our union. There is no "real" check and balance. For progress to happen, that needs to change.
07-27-2011, 07:53 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
The thing about replacing LEC reps is who do you replace them with. Most likely the guy you want replaced you never knew before but they did promise scope and pay, scope and pay, scope and pay. Now your options of people running are people you never knew before and they'll give you a letter that says scope and pay is their #1 priority. Then it just kind of disappears.
I have to agree with T, the union has a system in place that is impenetrable. Nobody is going to give up power and nobody is going to mess with the status quo and even if you do work within the system for change at the end of the day you're still ALPA.
I still can't understand that if we're smart enough to fly airliners and vote for the U.S. President why can't we directly vote for the MEC Chairman?
I have to agree with T, the union has a system in place that is impenetrable. Nobody is going to give up power and nobody is going to mess with the status quo and even if you do work within the system for change at the end of the day you're still ALPA.
I still can't understand that if we're smart enough to fly airliners and vote for the U.S. President why can't we directly vote for the MEC Chairman?
07-27-2011, 08:02 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
It is not wasted time. It is my opinion that there is support to a modification to our current pay system. Also, have you sent that proposal to your new reps? If not I would.
I also "get" what you are getting at, but I am also telling you that, just because you "think/demand" it, does not mean the rest of your peers feel the same way. It takes a heck of a lot of work to get the changes you are seeking. Most do not want to put the work in, they just want others to do their bidding. That in effect is why we are where we are in our union. There is no "real" check and balance. For progress to happen, that needs to change.
I also "get" what you are getting at, but I am also telling you that, just because you "think/demand" it, does not mean the rest of your peers feel the same way. It takes a heck of a lot of work to get the changes you are seeking. Most do not want to put the work in, they just want others to do their bidding. That in effect is why we are where we are in our union. There is no "real" check and balance. For progress to happen, that needs to change.
You are probably right that many of my peers don't want the same things I do. The problem is that a lot of the fringe ideas out there never see the light of day, because of the strength of the union machinery to perpetuate the status quo as being the only way to do things. The "changes" I am "seeking" are one man's thoughts on how to get more pilots involved in the day to day process. It's very simple really, you have to make the meetings more accessible to the average guy, and continuing to have base meetings where the majority of guys are not physically located does nothing to promote this involvement. You can jump up and down and hold your breath all day and tell guys they need to get involved, but until you satisfy that ease of access, you are spitting in the wind.
But I am sure I am wrong....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
