busdriver12

I have worn my ALPA lanyard for most of these years, however, I don't see the point of lecturing people about it right now. Wouldn't mind the lecture if it came with information that we are getting ready to negotiate.Here is the timeline, and we expect to have something good to hand you by the time this contract expires, not three years later.

UnusualAttitude

Unfortunately, what many of us would like to see is an admission by ALPA of “yes we see these unintended consequences you’ve all pointed out and next time we are going to work harder and do better to write solid indisputable language.”

When I’ve spoken to my reps I’ve either been admonished, ridiculed, or found that they simply didn’t understand how the contract language actually worked.

Then we have those (Kronan and Co.) who think that opining a desire for improvements in certain sections or shining light on weakness in current language makes you anti-ALPA. It doesn’t. It makes you a pilot who pays attention, stays informed, and wants better for the future.

For the record, no one in management from the bottom to the top cares what lanyard you wear. It really doesn’t send this message that some think it does. In fact the very idea that a lanyard somehow shows unity in an agency shop is dumb. It shows we are distracted playing checkers while the company plays chess.

The only lanyard campaign I’ve seen that worked was the Orange Lanyard campaign at Delta to send a message to ALPA that they were failing the pilot group. As it turns out what DAL management realized was they DALPA wasn’t going to he able to carry their water and act as their TA selling agent anymore. ALPA actually realized they were going to have to represent the pilots.

Lastly, anyone upset with the company is misplacing their consternation. The company serves but one master, the bottom line. Anything allowed that meets both regulatory and contractual compliance to their most beneficial interpretation their going to employ to their benefit. As a shareholder I get it. It’s ALPA’s place to ensure that the language matches the intent no matter who tries to interpret it.

I’ve personally been treated with much more respect by the company when I had questions than I have by my reps.


-UA

CHP1

That's well said.

Fdxlag2

Actually I would bet Kronan, like me, certainly knows better than most that the contract needs improving. Certainly as a no voter on both FDA LOAs and the Bridge to nowhere contract I wanted improvements in a lot of sections. I know I gave up on 2015 retirement improvements when “we” collectively told the company we aren’t going to listen to you and we only want our A Plan expanded.

You guys attack Kronan every time he points out that there were improvements and provides some education. I outed the poser who was simpering about how much he lost in 2015 and never again he was going to screw all his buddies. Than I got to spend 10 posts debating whether a 57-43 vote is “significant” without a single one of you warriors mentioning the guy who is planning on playing F your buddy.

UnusualAttitude

I ignored his statement because it was ridiculous. I also don’t really care what one person considers significant or not. That’s just a distraction. It was a schoolyard “my dad is faster than your dad” conversation. That being said, it doesn’t cost anything to opine on this forum and if you guys want to argue over how different dictionaries define words in certain contexts then it’s your prerogative.

Now to what actually matters. “I know better than most” is the attitude that hurts us. I’m sure when you bid in the top 5% there are pages of the contract that simply don’t effect you anymore. Nothing wrong with choosing seniority and QOL over money, I applaud it. What many seem to want is to be listened to when they express how shortcomings in the contract are effecting their careers. That’s how we improve. Saying, “I know better than you” basically makes most people tune you out immediately.

Your attempted insult of calling those who are critical of anything you disagree with “warriors” is also damaging to your argument and position. Sarcasm is great for reasons of humor but rarely does it help one further their point of view or win an argument.

-UA

Nightflyer

"My" union is trying to screw me out of my guaranteed retirement for the benefit of those over 25 years at my expense.

I won't be wearing a union lanyard as long as the "leadership" proceeds with this asinine plan.

Perhaps if they actually listened to the masses, instead of telling us what we should believe (they lied to us last time, they will lie to us again) they would get more support.

Since we have agency shop, not wearing a lanyard is the only way they can see my displeasure.

The union leadership has said "trust us" so many times, and been wrong so many times, they have lost my support.

MEMA300

Yep. Every time I tell the union what I think or ask why we are or aren’t doing something they act like I’m an uninformed voter on contract issues bcz I can’t formally name the officers of ALPA.

A little history lesson, when we switched from FPA back to ALPA (for 2nd time) there were a few reasons stated pointing out what ALPA can do for us that FPA can’t. Well none of those things have come to fruition (deep pockets, better real time costing/language during sec 6 bargaining) so on and so forth.

Sorry but as a pro union or (yes guy) from the 90s ALPA has been a sad disappointment.

Huck

If you think about it, free speech would mean changing the channel once in a while.....

kronan

I am often amazed at all of the mind reading that occurs on the internet. As well as the forgetfulness.

On more than one post, I've commented on issues I'd like to see improved on during the Next TA.

Whether you were a Yes voter or a No Voter, there are things CRS isn't doing post TA2015.
One of the things CRS was doing pre-ratification was Revising a DH to work to a DH to a different city. Surprisingly enough, changing layover locations doesn't trigger SUB. Now there's a 3CH penalty for making that change.
Another thing that was squeezing in another AM leg just under the duty limits, think we'd all agree that 3 flights in the Critical duty period-Sucks, huge. And that's if everything goes as scheduled.
Now there's an automatic extra 1.5CH.

One thing that absolutely needs to be added in for the next CBA, is disruption when FedEx Cancels a Front End DH. It's a rare event, but occasionally FedEx is revising a Sunday PM DH to work to an operating leg. And if you're one those wait to the last minute Initial Deviation check-in folks...you're hosed, unless you can get to Memphis. And it doesn't cost the company a penny.

IMO-there should be at least a 3CH disruption...add in a requirement that any Front end DH cancellation has to be X hours in advance or, perhaps a requirement than any SUB trip associated with a Front end DH must ALSO be a Front end DH.

kronan

Here's one more, for the R24 crowd.

Then, as now, R24 pilots most commonly "launched" on HSBYs (your mileage may vary, only had One 4 Day HSBY assigned during one of my most recent R24 awards--no other trips, so yes, was paid to stay at home)

Prior to CBA2015, one of the things CRS was doing was "Revising" your 4 day HSBY into a 5 or 6 day block after being launched.

Doesn't happen now.