This is exactly my understanding of what's going on.

Because unions don't decide who merger partners are.

Carl

Exactly!

Carl

I don't think they need to. Like I said in my first posts, the arguments are already over. This is now only about counting cards. And if what DPA is saying on the site is true, they will have no problem reaching the 51% level.

Carl

Sorry for the insult, but if my recollection of thigs is right almost on every issue we have voted on the Union Boys sell it to us and tell us that if we don't pass this then we will end up with alot worse situation. THink back and what were you told by reps when it came time to vote on something. Don't get me wrong, there are some really good guys out there that do work for the pilots but overall most of the reps turn into ALPA national servants after the trip to Herndan.

A very interesting post. I think you're correct about discontent driving people, and I think it's revealing both you and "them" are so starved for input that you would vote for anyone that promises it.

The weird part about this is that, contrary to public perception on the web, I think ALPA is doing exactly what the pilots want. Before you puke on your keyboard, hear me out... Even though Wilson polling has been commissioned to do some f'd up surveys in the past (like Prater's Age 65 abomination), generally the DALPA surveys give a chance for input, and are well done. I think they give a very accurate picture of the pilot group to the union. And, for obvious reasons, the results cannot be released. How would C12 go, if for example it was revealed the Delta pilots would be happy with a 12% raise (I'm making up a number)?

I am NOT saying I think we're getting enough input on important LOA's, but I am saying that, generally speaking, the MEC probably correctly acts on issues that actually are important to the average Delta pilot. The people on these boards are not the average: they're more militant, more informed, and sometimes just plain nuts. The difference between what gets done by the MEC and what the forumites want accomplished probably is more attributable to the difference between the forumites and the average pilot, than the difference between the MEC and the forumites.

This is why there is such a discrepancy bewteen what say we want on the web, and the huge "Yes" votes we get on most T/A's. The fact is, this quaint little internet community is not representative of the pilot group at large. The silent majority remains silent in these parts, but they vote. And their expectations are probably more modest than we would like to see.

So I think the idea that the MEC acts without keeping the pilots in mind, or without accurately representing them is a actually a myth.

That does NOT mean I think they're giving us enough MEMRAT input. But I do think that we could have more MEMRAT, and the forumites would still walk away disgusted at every turn. They'd be disgusted at other pilots rather than the MEC, but the results would be the same.

So, if I'm correct that the MEC correctly represents the pilots, then where is the problem? What are they doing wrong?

In my mind, the flaw is not in the way the get input from the pilots (even if that input disappoints the radicals among us), but in the way they communicate back to us. I think there is a real disconnect between the product they offer (at DALPA, not National), and the marketing of that product. We continuously get the results of LOA's with what feels like a minimal explanation, and no opportunity for input. I think that, if they articulated their position more clearly and effectively, and gave us more input via MEMRAT, it would not change any LOA, but it would certainly make the pilots feel far more connected.

It's difficult to bear the silence of the current MEC, which is only briefly interrupted by brief communications about what has already happened, with barely enough tidbits of information, like little tiny bread crumbs falling on our eager foreheads, as we stare in vain at the heavens above.

I don't know why they continuously screw this up, but it's going to have real consequences. An effective and fairly unified MEC is probably going to get populated by competing factions with agendas that don't serve the group as well. Good incumbents are going to get wiped out by some really inferior products, and this pilot group is going to wake up one day realizing we were so hungry for someone, anyone, that would actually speak to us like he understands, and someone, anyone, that would actually look at all of us directly in the eyes, that we picked the wrong leader.

What's the German name for "leader", again?

Can we stop the CAPA thread drift already? Or is thread drift your only argument left.

Carl

Awesome! A new cliche'!!! :rolleyes:

Carl

I'll play along, Carl.

Your examples from 20-30 years ago are of defunct companies that no longer have any employees. They were managed into oblivion and there were very limited options for any union to preserve jobs in those anti-union days. PAA MEC was able to secure jobs for about 25% of its membership at Delta. Eastern got Bush/Lorenzo'd. Braniff got screwed by the idiot management overexpanding post deregulation into a recession.

My examples were from your former airline during the last 5 years. That airline is actively hiring, yet none of the mechanics are here. The flight attendants got raided by another union while in bankruptcy and got 1113c'd. Their new union then ensured all of labor lost the right to strike after a contract rejection. Note the differences between your examples and mine?:rolleyes: Did I make it simple enough for Carl "logic?"

That's an interesting theory, but it doesn't match up with what I have observed over many years on the line. Most of the pilots with whom I have been privileged to fly express views that are much closer to what you call the "forum radicals" than they do to your "average pilots".

37 pages, 370 replies in 2 days... Nuff said, time for a change to the better for DAL pilots. I'm for one is 100% FOR this.

You know better ACL. It HAS been tried for decades and ALPA national beats back all challenges. This is NOT new!

Carl

New,

I agree with your statement above (bolded). Here is my question for all the ALPA defenders who don't seem to like this turn of events:

Are you guys saying we are in ALPA and that is that? We should not even discuss or evaluate their performance? We should never evaluate alternatives?

Or, we are in ALPA and the only way we should change it is through the ALPA voting process? We can change our representatives through votes but should never even consider changing our union?

If ALPA does not evolve to satisfy the needs of the pilot group why not consider alternative options?

I agree with New - I don't give a rats ass who represents us - as long as they do it well. What I don't agree with is this vibe that some of you are putting out that we ALPA - end of story - we shouldn't even commit what some deem the heresy of discussing other options.

I guess some of you think ALPA is a one party system - no competition allowed.

I repeat - I am not necessarily for ditching ALPA, but I am totally for a thorough discussion followed by a vote.

Scoop

You're not listening ACL. It can't be fixed from within. Stop the constant drift. This site is about the Delta Pilots Association. Please stop trying to make it the "How do we fix ALPA national from within" thread. Why don't you start that thread on your own instead of hijacking this one?

Carl

Pan Am's problem was a combination of things, management, it for years it did not have a domestic system to feed its internationl routes, deregulation hit, they had diverted money away from the core business (hotels etc) the management structure was packed with pilots run by a former general. There were a lot of issues at Pan AM, but ALPA was the least of its problems.

You see the fallacy in your own logic then. You tried to tie AMFA being broken to AMFA. The reality is that would have happened to any union. Eastern's unions were broken, and they were represented by ALPA and other large nationals.

I know you weren't trying to be logical, just shilling for ALPA national. That's all you know...I just want others to see it.

Carl

I understand why it might be a little bit of a mind-bender, but still, when the votes come in, we're a tame bunch.

I think there are several reasons for the discrepancy between what pilots say, and how they actually vote.:

1) I've never met a pilot that wanted to lose a *****ing contest. We're always very, very competitive in that event. You know the joke about pilots and the free house, right? There's more than a kernel of truth there.

2) Everyone has a pet issue they're very defensive about, but not everyone is very defensive on every issue. You'll have a conversation with a guy that will slit the throat of anyone that doesn't get him his retirement back, then a conversation with someone that wants to burn an RJ to the ground, then someone that wants a 50% raise, and one last guy that will strike if the words RAW Score are not stricken from the next contract. You might conclude all four pilots will burn the place to the ground over Scope, retirements, payrates, and the Reserve system, but, really, each guy will vote Yes based on the one or two issues, no matter what happens to the other 2 to four issues. The latest, most popular tack is for real senior guys to talk a lot about scope. If you're not capitalizing the letters on the forum, nowadays, you're just not cool. One 7ER candidate for Captain Rep in New York is campaigning on 1.5 pay for all pilots above 80 hours, and... SCOPE. SCOPE? Really? When is the last time you saw a group fail to trade SCOPE for retirements or payrates?

3) What you hear depends on where you sit. As I get more senior, and fly in bigger categories, the speech gets a lot... softer on many issues. As I slide back within my category, however, and people are flying domestic and redeyes, it gets a little more hardcore. For sure, if you're in the left seat, most F/O's are bound to sound more radical. So maybe I need an upgrade to get back closer to the truth.

I realize what I'm saying is anathema to what almost everyone that's on a web board wants to believe: that the silent majority is really, really militant, and held back by a compliant and weak MEC. I think the truth is that the majority is relatively compliant and worried about the company. I agree that there is universal annoyance with an MEC that seems to work in mysterious ways, but I wonder how dissapointed we might be if that MEC did what many of us clamor for, and released the results of their polling.

Another card sent in today.

You missed it again, but thanks for continuing to make the distinction between our points of view very clear, groundskeeper. Better get to work on those gophers...:p

AMFA got broken and it wouldn't have happened to any union....note that the successor to NWA is still here and they're not...:eek:

Professional negotiators is SO important.

Jerry G. Lawyer by trade. Did not negotiate his own empolyment contract.

Richard A. Lawyer by trade. Did not negotiate any of his own employment contracts.

Leo M. Not a lawyer, just a banker. Still wise enough to not negotiate his own contract. ( oh, and how about that SERP those lawyers negotiated for the Mahogany Row crew at the end??)

I will illustrate with a few bullet points:

* Negotiations are all about and infused with emotions. Therefore, it is best to have people conducting them who can remain unattached from an unemotional stand point.

(Ex. Hard Knocks this season with the Jets. Look at how tied up in knots Coach Ryan and the others became with Darelle Revis' hold out.)

* If those that you are negotiating with are allowing emotion to creep into the process and decison making, than expect the emotion to be manipulated.

(Ex. The whole BK process and sell job after attaining a TA / FUD, a classic tool. Another classic-Time. Wear down and fatigue your adversary and lower their expectations over time. 2 great examples of this: 3B6 when Malone sat the 777/73N and any law suit-deposition process )

We as pilots have been told time and time again, "If you are called into a meeting with the CPO for disciplinary reasons, bring a rep."

Same difference here. We need professional reps at the table that are backed up by Dalpa negotiators/reps.

Is it true or an urban legend that the secretaries at ALPA HQ make more than an MD-88 F/O? It's pretty bad when the labor at ALPA National has a better contract than we do.

Ok, so we have been attempting to make change for decades with no luck. We have had numerous changes in representation both locally and nationally however what has remained constant (from within alpa) all of these years? It is my understanding that the general counsel for alpa has been the constant through all of this. If that is the case, I would submit to you that is where we start because that just might be the root of the problem.

Who exactly negotiated their contracts?


I would say that is exactly what we have now.

Organization Query Page (ERDS)

ALPA's file number is 000179, click "submit"

Click "2009 Report" under Fiscal Year

And there you will find ALPA National's LM-2 filing.

I'm with you 100% on that, but ALPA national is taking the view of letting the RJ price itself out of the market. You have to get management to want to put scope back on the mainline willingly, the other way would be a disaster.

A good example of this is the SWA/Frontier proposed buy out. SWA management(labor friendly) allowed its own pilots to make the terms of the merger. This is very important because if the Frontier pilots didn't sign on, the deal was off. If management had just merged and let the pilots fight it out it probably would have looked a lot like AW/US.

From all that I have observed it looks like Moak is doing this. However, he can't say that in a public because the legal teams would have a field day with that one. If you haven't noticed DAL is hiring and its regionals are shedding pilots like crazy. With DPA you run the risk of souring the deal to put these planes back where they belong.

The problem with ALPA national is what you say it is, the lawyers make all their money off fighting these battles. There is definitely a need for a house cleaning at national, but a new union is not the way.

This is just my opinion. I could be wrong, take it FWIW.:D

Hardly. We have pilots who are put through some training backed up by ALPA lawyers. Those same lawyers that have produced those spectacular results and advice in the past;)

I don't disagree with you here but maybe what needs to be done is bring forth a resolution to review the performance of that counsel with the possibility of making changes.

What kind of annual review is done with our alpa staff and what is the definition of "successful performance"? These are questions that should be answered by National and distributed to to masses.

Your ignorance of history is telling. IAM was broken at Eastern. It would have happened at NWA regardless. Your opinion to the contrary is just opinon.

I'm very pleased to have a distinction made between a pure ALPA shill and a humble greenskeeper.

Carl

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This!!!

Carl

You could be right. Try it and keep us informed on your progress.

In the meantime, DPA is counting cards. It appears we have a multi-faceted effort.

Carl

We do NOT. Seriously man, we have line pilots that go to seminars on negotiations.

Carl

I don't mean to sound disrespectful, but what do you think old farts like me have been doing for DECADES? Do you really think your ideas are new? Really?? ALPA has beaten back all resistance...for DECADES! Including your idea of bringing forth resolutions.

Carl

You know, maybe it really is this core legal counsel and legacy national employees that are "ALPA" and that this system can't change. I don't know and I too am frustrated at what I "perceive to be truth".

Maybe our profession has matured to the point that we no longer require a "union affiliation" but instead professional pilots require a lobbying group and let us individually (on a per company scale) negotiate contracts. I really don't know but I do know there is a lot of fear mongering and half truths (from both sides of this argument) and what we all really want are the facts clearly laid out for us to see/read and make up our own adult mind.

Don't get me wrong, I support the idea of the card drive and hopefully it will produce information that we all desire. I don't know that I can support the identified president of DPA however. That is my opinion and I will leave it at that.

Don't go here unless you are ready to really be angry. I'll give an extremely short recap below:

General manager......$411,100
Chief Counsel..........$411,100
Contract Admin.......$242,800
Web Architect........$129,800
Chief economist......$314,300
Staff attorney........$244,500
Lobbyist................$177,600
Finance director......$240,500
Real estate mgr.......$137,900
Ops manager...........$204,300

Again, this is an extremely short portion of the list for 2009.

Tsquare, does this partially answer your question?

Carl

Heyas Carl,

Don't forget TWA.... ALPA went up against the APA...who came out on top?

Seriously, back to your discussion:

The "reform" of ALPA is a moot point. You can vote in whoever you want, in those cases where you have any kind of vote at all.

Look at DALPA.... Good people in the LECs spend the time to put together a resolution, and it is IGNORED by the MEC.

"But", they say, "the few people who show up at a LEC meeting isn't the 'will of the pilot group'". Guess what? NEITHER ARE LEC ELECTIONS!, BECAUSE THATS HOW IT WORKS...ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE AND TAKE THE TIME HAVE THEIR VOTE COUNTED.

Are they saying the individual LEC reps don't represent the will of the pilot group? How can that be? Should reps from councils with a %15 participation in elections be stripped of their voting power?

Besides, even if you vote for people, it matters not. ALPA wisely (for them), changed the election cycle to 3 years. You can't do ANY meaningful housecleaning when you have 3 year cycles, and the REAL moving and shaking isn't with the LEC reps anyway...it is inside the committee structure.

With the above said, however, let me give a word of advice to the DPA folks:

You better be ready. You better bring your A game and have your shields up. You'd better have more people and resources than a website and some bag stickers. You don't mess with the cash flow that DAL represents and not expect a full out battle that will be mean and nasty....because it IS about the money, and your hand will be in someone's pocket...the full resources of ALPA National will be turned against you. If you are just three guys with some anger and a intrawebz connection, you will get STEAMROLLED and by doing so, you will sour the pilot group and probably block any chance for reform for at least a decade. It will be worse than if you didn't do anything at all.

And for God's sake, have someone literate working on your communications. Bad grammar and creative spelling makes any effort look like a carnival of dunces no matter how many people say "speeling duddn't count".

Hire Slow, maybe...he seems pretty good at it.

Nu

Please, don't worry about being disrespectful, I really am listening. I am relatively young in this organization so the history lessons are great for all of us.

Maybe it has been tried before but what about a combined effort from the other big bitters within alpa (ual, fdx, etc) to hit national squre in the face with change. I am sure it has been done before but am just thinking out loud (well not actually out loud). ;)

If that doesn't work, can't you and T go break some knee-caps

There will be no official leadership of any kind until after decertification. Then the membership will elect their new leaders.

Carl

And no one you met has ever voted for LOA 46, 51 LOA 19, the JCBA etc. It is easy to present an angered approach to a guy that shows anger an animosity towards the Association. It saves a confrontation and debate from a guy that is not as engaged as you or I.

Were you even on the property for any of that? Go back to sticking your finger in the dyke. ALPA National is rotten to the core. Time for a change.

Sigh...

Carl