It would be hard to illustrate the arrogance of power within the DALPA bureaucracy any better than this. Our union's own processes that ensure fairness and equal representation don't matter nearly as much as winning.

The fact that our processes were purposely subverted in order to "win" the battle is the single biggest reason our MEC is so divided to this day. Yet Karnak and the others in DALPA's permanent bureaucracy crow about it.

Process does matter. We all lose when we find ways not to follow our processes. I was obviously a NO vote on TA 2012, but many friends of mine who voted YES did so because they felt they'd been maneuvered into a no win situation. If that's the way our MEC administration "wins", it only shows how weak their positions truly are. So weak that they have to be hidden from the members until it's too late to complain.

Carl

Astounding really.

You are now going to take the customer base and constituency of DALPA, the ever harder working revenue generating line pilots, and divide the into winners and losers vis a vis our contract negotiations!

Holy schitt! It should be the goal that after reaching a TA that there are no winners and losers, only winners. Then you know you have a good contract agreement.

You know when you have an excellent one? When you can step back and say with a smile on your face that the TA "stands in it's own merits" much like was done in C2K.

But to come here on the eve of attaining our next agreement and categorize your customers as winners and losers is beyond arrogant.

Wake up renob!

The DPA got nearly enough cards for a vote. Does that not even register with you still? I have been an ALPA member, supporter and volunteer for going on 26 years. I followed intently during that challenge by the DPA , listened to their grievances, lots of them petty some of them significant, and carefully weighed the evidence.

My conclusion was that Dalpa was and is our best choice. That being said, it has been subverted by a group of individuals, whose motives that are self serving at best, to an extent that it compromises the goals and aims of the institution. There were appeals by Dalpa that they understood some of the criticisms and that they were going to be addressed. I, for one, believed that to be true.

Apparently not.

Your statement is perfect crystal clear proof of that. It is not functioning as a bottom up organization. It's the Cabal vs everyone else. My belief was that even though Dalpa is a far superior choice over DPA, there is lots of room for reform and change within the association. Most obviously is the need for a change in who is in some of the leadership and committee positions.

Here is the bottom line. If a screwed up leader like Caplinger can muster up a near miss like he did, the next one up is not going to make the same mistakes.

Kind if like Parker and his severely lacking plan at making a run at Delta. He learned from it and executed flawless at AMR. Take the combination of people like you Karnak who haven't learned and consider themselves politically entrenched and bullet proof. When another group that is organized, on message and exploits the issues where you all have made promises and failed, and add a respected and organized group of leaders, and not just is Dalpa done, ALPA will be as well.

I don't think that's a good analogy. Bernie was a crook, and his victims weren't a collective group presented with the specifics of his "investment" strategy.

I disagree. I think we are a group of professional skeptics who trust, but verify. As I've pointed out to Carl, the reps who urged us to vote No made their case. In my council, Steve and Ron listed their heartburn with the TA in clear, point-by-point fashion. The 3rd rep, Dan, was the least strident. He recommended voting Yes.

I didn't hear that. I understand the sentiment, but disagree with blind trust. My sense was that the pilot's vote was driven by the "big ticket" items, and that most of us found those acceptable.

If the "legal jargon" you mention includes the 3B4 "Me Too" bit that got us an unanticipated pay rate bump, then I don't see it as a serious problem.

There were certainly a couple of areas where Delta has chosen to interpret the contract in a way that wasn't the intent of the Negotiators (what constitutes "verification" in a sick event is the most glaring), but I view them as small issues that we can work around with common sense.

Good trough…or bad trough? I like where we are, and like my W2. I wouldn't trade places with any of my peers at any other airline. Would you?

Thanks for sticking to the issues. I appreciate it.

Exactly. Astounding and scary. The extreme arrogance.

Either C2015 will stand on its own or ALPA is done. No sell job. No threats. Just the facts.

In this environment of record profits and an ever shrinking pilot pool, anything less is unacceptable.

Leverage is everywhere. One example being the collapse of the regional carriers. IMO RA will be the first mover. The larger regional jets will come to mainline. Delta has sold the DCI carriers as Delta and they are an embarrassment. The only solution is to bring this flying home to the mainline.

It was a VOTE. In every vote there is a "winning" side, and a "losing" side.

Did anyone vote against C2K?

Why?

Prove it. I don't think they came close.

Thank you for making my point. You are a pilot who carefully evaluated the issues and made a decision. Did you do that with C2012? Do you think anyone who voted Yes on C2012 did the same thing?

I agree. I think ALPA could use some changes and improvements. I share my thoughts with my reps, then trust them to weigh my criticisms against the other input they get, and act accordingly.

It seems like it's always 'circular logic' after every contract vote. When I hear guys complaining about the contract (ever since we got membership ratification in 1996) and ask them, "Well, why did you vote for it?"

Their answer is, "The MEC told me to!" (and they know a lot more about what's in it than I do...and they wouldn't lie to me...and I was too lazy to read it my self or go to a meeting and find out what's in it, and I can't afford to go on strike, and and and...)

When I then ask an MEC guy, "WHY did you guys vote YES to this POS??"

Their answer is, "Well...the membership didn't DEMAND more, so we felt this was the best we could do, absent a strike, and the membership didn't want a strike, and time value of money, and we'll get them next time, and and and..."

So we have a MEC who won't lead or push management for more, or mention the word Restoration, and a membership who won't demand restoration, and will vote YES for anything the MEC puts in front of them, because, they must know best, right?

It's a circle jerk.

Remember these classics?:

"There was no money left on the table."

"We'll never see those 3% raises."

"They'll start hiring immediately."

There's plenty of blame to go around, I blame both the membership, for being lazy and stupid, and I blame the MEC, for not getting them riled up or ever keeping account of what the Pilots gave to save the company in LOA 46 and 51 and the DB plan, or for ever even being able to utter the word; Restoration.

Neither were Delta pilots which is why the analogy is spot on. I knew exactly what the MEC administrators were going to try to ram through from the jumbo RJ's to the pay rates funded by profit sharing cuts and other concessions. That was pretty easy to see. What shocked me was the extent the MEC administration would go to ram it through. I never considered the fact that they would ignore the direction of the MEC and sign a TA with management, then dare the MEC to defy them. That strategy was something nobody saw coming...just like Madoff's strategy of a crooked Ponzi scheme. Our reps never thought an administration would ever stoop that low, and yet you're proud of it. Truly amazing.

Carl

Again, you're deflecting from the point. Our reps purposely stayed away from the internal disaster of the MEC administration signing off on a TA that didn't meet their specific direction. The reps chose to state their pros and cons as they saw it...and that was the professional thing to do.

We're talking about guys like you doing anything to "win." Even if it means trashing our process.

Some did, but others felt like the MEC put them in an impossible situation with the internal dysfunction.

Pretty sure he was talking about the trough that is the ALPA lifestyle of large salaries and large parties. It is apparently a trough that once experienced, you'll do anything to remain there.

I like where we are because of the way our executive management team is strategizing and executing. I don't like the fact that my contract doesn't lead the industry in one single section. I don't like the fact that SWA and FDX make a ton more than me.

I like my airline, but my contract is second tier.

Carl

Your backtracking is duly noted, but that's not what you said. This is what you said:

You described members who were on the losing side of the vote as "losers." You went further to infer that we cried "process" because we couldn't accept being "losers."

As distasteful as it is, you're not alone. Many in the MEC administration share your views.

Carl

Great post!