None of that seems concerning for only 2 more years. A small percentage of retirees would come back any way and there is not legal justification to be at their previous justification.

therefore ALPA can be politically irrelevant and stay on their present side, similar to asking for this secondary barrier that makes all of us and them look like they are trying to build a penitentiary in the fwd galley 24 years after 9/11

 

GOBBLESS


(hello fellow r/motorcycles enthusiast &#129761

 

Everyone mentions ALPA flip flopping as if it was a last minute betrayal. What I'm seeing is "I don't want you to screw me, but if you're going to anyways I want to at least have a say in how" and I don't necessarily have a problem with that. If 67 becomes inevitable, then Im fine with ALPA changing rhetoric to keep a seat at the implementation table.

 

It was a last minute betrayal. In the aftermath of 9/11, ALPA literally folded on everything. Nothing was sacred: scope, pensions, pay, retirement age, you name it... In ALPA's view, nothing seemed worth holding the line for. MEC after MEC would fold under threat of bankruptcy after ALPA National's strong-arming, only for the company to file for Chapter 11 anyway and now use now concessionary contract as the starting point for further cuts, but this time while in Chapter 11.

ALPA was opposed to Age 65, and they even ran at least one or two membership-wide surveys which told them that majority of ALPA did not support changing the mandatory age. So when "Fair Treatment of EXPERIENCED Pilots" passed, ALPA changed its stance and then supported raising the age, despite that thousands of pilots were furloughed for years, and many mainline jobs were flown for pennies on the dollar because regional FO's would qualify for public assistance.

I think our disagreement stems from belief that I think an organization such as ALPA has a duty to represent and fight for its members. During those years, it failed miserably on multiple fronts, not just Age 60. That was just a nail in the coffin for me.

 

Please, be specific. What Lies is ALPA telling? And specifically how are they demeaning 1/3of thier membership?

Specifics.

 

How did ALPA back then justify their change of heart to the pilot group?

 

I agree that very few would come back after age 65, and even if they did, it would be for less than two more years. So reasonably it's less of a looming threat than last time.

When it went to 65...
1. That was still too young for most folks to hang it up.
2. Pensions had just been canx, so many folks truly needed to work whether they wanted to or not.
3. A bunch of guys coming back for nearly five years in that climate would have been bad.

 

They claimed that if they didn't drop their opposition, they would be left out of the implementation process. Personally, I don't buy it considering it is the largest pilot union in the country, but that's just my opinion. Bear in mind, this was after watching ALPA fold and give away the farm time after time without so much as a whimper.

They did have a catchy slogan tho.... "Taking it back."

 

That rationale won’t work this time. Therefore the call for them to change now because they inevitably will, is unfounded, brah.

 

I understand the feeling of betrayal, but I gotta say I don't necessarily disagree with what ALPA did. I'm opposed to 67. I know ALPA is opposed to 67 right now. But if tomorrow it was obvious that the powers that be were going to push it along regardless of what ALPA wanted, I fully understand the sentiment of feigning cooperation for the sake of having a seat at the table. Fighting it to the end knowing you're gonna lose sounds honorable and all that but would it have really been the smart thing to do? This is also knowing that the pilot group back then had little to no leverage in the post-911 era. Different time with different individuals running unions under completely different circumstances and different mindsets.