![]() |
Originally Posted by Gearjerk
(Post 1145023)
Only thing "lame" about it is that DPA hasn't figured out the meaning of "fish or cut bait" yet, or here's another for you, "$h!t or get off the pot".
Again, the only reason I put the disclaimer in there was to make sure the "Carl's/88's/Scambo's" of this forum don't get their "panties in a wad" so early on a Saturday morning. GJ Carl |
Originally Posted by FIIGMO
(Post 1145041)
Carl,
Maybe you know and maybe you don't. Those that I have asked about DPA while flying and in the crew lounge or over a beer etc, have not articulated to me in any meaningful way exactly how DPA will get a better contract for our group. It is crystal clear that they feel DPA will be more transparent, communicate better lower our dues, higher better lawyer's and just be better in general. Which is it the SWA model the APA model the ALPA model? Second, the BIG difference with a non-ALPA union will be the lack of conflict regarding the regionals. We can unabashedly go after returning our flying to us without facing the certain lawsuits from the regionals for failing in the duty to fairly represent. This is a HUGE deal. The fact that DALPA and ALPA cannot print a single word about scope or a single word about spending negotiating capital to get our flying back should tell you everything you need to know. An in-house union would have no such restrictions. I know this makes me sound like a one note musician, but there is simply NOTHING more important than scope. And because ALPA represents both sides, they've self-muzzled themselves on this most important topic. Carl |
Originally Posted by FIIGMO
(Post 1145041)
If that is the only viable option then I say short interim LOA 20% now, re-designate SEA as a hub (force their hand regarding Alaska), balance all code shares, freeze scope, important work rule changes etc. Then give DPA or ??? a chance to work.
Freezing scope would very likely mean the end of the airline we know now. The airline would still exist, but its pilots would not. Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1145062)
Two things. First is the model, which is the SWAPA model. They are a far more functional union in many ways. They have a great relationship with management but ONLY because they've stood up to management everytime with the important issues like scope. That has earned them a level of mutual respect from management. You don't earn respect being a lapdog...even though management will be glad to describe you as a "new style of union leader" in the Wall Street Journal if needed to make you feel better about your surrender.
Second, the BIG difference with a non-ALPA union will be the lack of conflict regarding the regionals. We can unabashedly go after returning our flying to us without facing the certain lawsuits from the regionals for failing in the duty to fairly represent. This is a HUGE deal. The fact that DALPA and ALPA cannot print a single word about scope or a single word about spending negotiating capital to get our flying back should tell you everything you need to know. An in-house union would have no such restrictions. I know this makes me sound like a one note musician, but there is simply NOTHING more important than scope. And because ALPA represents both sides, they've self-muzzled themselves on this most important topic. Carl |
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1144787)
How about the SWAPA model? They seem to really fight for their pilots and get them the highest pay and bennies they can, without bowing to the Regionals thanks to a "conflict of interest." Just tell me there isn't a conflict of interest between the Regional pilots wants and the Mainline pilots' wants. ALPA seems to try to split down the middle, and I AM NOT PAYING money for that. I want all of MY interests sought for, not what a Regional guy wants. I am not paying for him. But, I will give Dalpa one more chance to show my they can get us a GREAT new contract. If the TA is poor, then it will be voted down, and I bet Dalpa will be gone next. I don't care if it takes awhile to get the DPA established, it's better than waiting 4 more years for the next contract with a bad current one. And we know RA and SD want it done sooner than later because of possible continuing consolidation.
|
Originally Posted by BoyFromSouth
+1 I could not agree more. We have bigger fish to fry than sending out a servey that deals with uniforms and hats. The survey should have asked more important questions concerning pay, scope, insurance, reserve, retirement and other quality of life issues. I can only wonder how much time and money was spent on such a worthless survey to the pilot group. ALPA should have thought this one thru a little better. BFS |
Originally Posted by FIIGMO
(Post 1145067)
Lucid and direct and I totally agree! No old timers disease that I note.... as of yet!:D
Carl |
Originally Posted by Seaslap8
(Post 1145072)
SWAPA is certainly the flavor of the moment, but really I'm not sure why. They were perennially under paid which made their management's model that much more effective...they followed ALPA up the ladder by virtue of the DALPA CK2000 dot, and have been able to stay there due to continued profits (at least until recently)...they may very well indeed prove to be the "be all and end all" of unions, but judging by the way they stepped on the heads of the Airtran pilots to eat their young to keep things rolling...I'm not overly optimistic.
|
..............
|
Where is the March Raw buckets? March seniority list? Maybe they are working really hard on the next AE.... But I would really like to know what the buckets are this month! Someone must know.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:46 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands