Heyas T,

Check out the Council 20 update from 9/23. You can find it under the LEC links after you sign into the DALPA site. I won't post it here, since you can find it easily enough. I read it and was almost sick.

Not a rumor. These are active plans under consideration. SOME won't be decided by your elected representatives, but ONLY by the Executive Committee...made up only of MEC Chairmen (yea, the guys/gals not elected by the membership).

We just went through a gigantic ****ing contest (which was unnecessary according to the Parliamentarian) regarding the 3 vs 4 man NC for the second time, and all of a sudden THIS gem pops up at the national level?

Maximum of three negotiators

Of all the potential bloat, they want to cut ONE GUY doing actual work? And how about that timing? Coincidence?

FORTUNATELY this sorta got shot down, otherwise we'd have to hold ANOTHER NC election. It got modded to permit 4 man teams if the company is ponying up for one guy.

Other gems:

Eliminate non-status representatives
Close LEC offices
Potential option to replace the non-status representative with an LEC Executive Administrator (EA)- APPOINTED NOT ELECTED

Read the comments by the Council 20 Chairman. He was concerned not only with the contents of these proposals, but the manner in which they were delivered.

The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing...the relaxation of scope permitting the sale of Compass without a DC-9 replacement on the mainline property.

Let me repeat that...the sale of Compass was PREVENTED from happening unless there was a DC-9 replacement. There was NO facilitation to sell Compass until AFTER the JCBA. THEY COULDN'T SELL COMPASS UNTIL WE LET THEM.

This restriction was present in the fNWA PWA, and in the JCBA, it vanished. It was removed on purpose and was a relaxation in scope no matter how you slice it.

Nu

 

I read all of that which was associated with that link a few weeks ago. It made me sick too. The S/T position as a rep around the horseshoe plays a vital role. They represent their pilot's interests without a vote. On many levels they are more vocal and get a lot done. I think that is one bad idea to get rid of them.

I also did not like rumor running around about the dues structure. If that one passes, lets just say it will be ugly for ALPA.

Most LEC's do not have offices per se, Some do like C44, but more LEC's use the space that their MEC has. If they want to save that money it may be a good idea, but it needs to be discussed.

I also heard that they Reps wanted to see the actual proposal but had not gotten a copy of it a few weeks ago. Did that change?

 

Bingo. The fact that it was left out of the JCBA I think was more ignorance... much like the air carrier thing with the RAH thing.

They are VERY good at doing stuff like that and going "aw whoops. we'll catch it next time!" after the ship has already sailed.

After all, it's the best lawyers in the industry!

 

Heyas ACL,

DTW has 2,000 pilots. Their "office" is hardly more than a closet.

Get rid of one rep, and you have 1 rep per 1,000 pilots...WAY more than any other rep in ALPA.

Nu

 

C20 Update:

... removed by request of NuGuy.


------ ------ END ---- ----

Opinion: Closing the LEC Offices while under threat from the DPA is really dumb. Why aren't the Reps discussing this with our membership?

 

Heyas Bar,

Not appropriate, IMHO, for posting here. For those interested, they know where to go.

We can talk about laundry, but we don't need to hang it outside.

Nu

 

Please post that language.

That is the language from your contract. It says that NWA had to retain at least 50% ownership unless one of two things happened:

A. They buy at least 10 aircraft with 77-110 seat capacity or

B. They have to comply with the lower cap of 51-76 seat aircraft in Section 1 B.7.c(7)(a).

That limit was complied with in the JCBA. There was a specific exception written into the old NWA contract to allow the sale.

What language are you referring to that precluded the sale?

 

Nu,

Have to respectfully disagree with you. It is a structural change that, as I read it, effects all members.

Out of respect for your request, I pulled the post down. However, Alpha continually makes "double dog dares" to get this stuff posted.

 

Who cares?

LEC office - Not needed. Costs money. Never seen anyone in the MSP one and we could do with that cypher lock in ATL. Non-Status representatives - They don't vote. They can be as vocal as they want it doesn't matter if they can't vote. FPL for a guy who just bemoans. Really?

It sounds like getting rid of bloat and administration and cost. It's all I've ever read on these threads. What's the heartache now? Who cares if there's a secretary in the DTW Council? Trim the phat sez I.

 

DTW already has one A rep and one B rep for each 1,000 pilots. No change from status quo. Recollection serves me that the CAL EWR FO rep has even more than the DAL DTW FO rep and either DAL ATL FO rep.