I don't know this for a fact, but I hope the reason the DPA guys are continuing is because of people like me urging them NOT to suspend activities under any circumstances. My opinion is that the DPA's existence is the only reason DALPA hasn't already caved in scope via LOA prior to Section 6.

ALPA has no political relationships, with one exception: Politicians take ALPA's (our) money and allow ALPA a seat at the table. That's the relationship. That's it. The sooner everyone gets past the ALPA advertising slogans, the sooner you'll be able to understand what's going on around you.

I'm surprised you still say things like this. Do you not pay attention to very recent history? The problem at American is not the APA as a union. The problem at American is the widely varied opinion of the pilots. Some of them are "constructive engagement" types. Others are not and want to get complete restoration plus cost of living back all in the first year. ALPA thought they could come in and show APA how it's done. But what happened? The first time ALPA was publicly insulted for being secretive and having ulterior motives, ALPA very publicly withdrew their services and walked away from the pilots of American.

The question you should be asking yourself is: What will ALPA do differently this time now that they've apparently rejoined APA? Because so far, ALPA has only served to delay APA's contract hopes for the entire time ALPA has been there.

Carl

If DPA continues their quest I don't think they will carry the torch. However, even if they do, we will be well in 2015 or later before we see a new contract.

The right thing for them to do is to abandon their de-certification effort and join the other 8000-9000 pilots in showing a united face toward mgt. That is the fastest way to, "restoration".

T

You cannot force unity in my opinion. Unity is earned through respect and honest communications. If ALPA won't do it, DPA will. If ALPA won't produce a TA based on what the pilots really want, a majority of us will vote NO and send them back to the table. I don't believe you can use the general concept of "unity" as a bludgeon to stifle the democratic process. You'll only make the desire for a new direction stronger.

I don't think I make a damn bit of difference. But if by "your" presence you mean the DPA's presence, I think you're right. But they need to be hyper-ventilating. I want them more scared of us than they are of not getting their next plumb management/government job.

I respectfully disagree. I have no trust in ALPA to look out for my future. They've proven themselves untrustworthy in court. But I'm stuck with them right now. As such, I have to support their efforts to gain the maximum we can gain, until the second I can replace them.

Again, I respectfully disagree. We can all walk and chew gum at the same time. If ALPA is upset because they think they will be negotiating with a gun at their heads, that's exactly how I want them to feel. Especially during the "meet and confer" sessions with the regionals that are doing the majority of OUR flying.

Carl

This is a totally false choice. We can do both. There is no factual basis to conclude that the DPA's presence and effort will delay our contract to 2015 or later. None.

We can show a united face to management by having this current ALPA squad represent us at the negotiating table, while at the same time have management know that ALPA is out the door the second ALPA shows any weakness. These two things happening concurrently is actually the strongest hand we can have in front of management. This is why management is fighting so hard to keep DPA off the property.

Carl

+1.........

Yeah, sure. "Grow a pair.... just like APA"?

You've got their attention Carl. (and yes, by "you" I mean DPA). I think as a result of DPA success, DALPA is far more aware of the pilot group's deep apprehension about too much Moak-style constructive engagement leading to a management walkover in Contract 2012.

I just think that your "walking and chewing gum" metaphor understates the seriousness of a simultaneous decertification drive going on while the contract is open.
Perhaps a more appropriate analogy would be "fighting a two-front war".
I don't want DALPA to have to do that if we can avoid it.
Respectfully.

Wow!! Spot on post.

I don't know who you are, but you are one smart dude.

Best Reguards

will hold on to this picture.... :D

What is it about the value of having influence in DC that you don't understand?