Bucking Bar

As you wrote & I agree ...

Carl Spackler

I disagree with you PG. I think what APA is doing is extremely important for all of us. They are fighting the battle against NMB who are massively abusing their authority by refusing to declare an impasse. A judge will ulitmately have to step in and do what the NMB refuses to do, and that will define a new process that NMB will no longer be able to flout.

If APA just caved in order to get something, then NMB will not be held to account and the process may not be properly defined. It's not a guarantee that we'll get this defined afterwards, but APA's fight is a fight for all of us. IMO.

Carl

Carl Spackler

I hope so too, but if they don't, we should! We should lead our profession back to the top if no one else can!

Carl

Pineapple Guy

We'll see.

Bucking Bar

No offense PG, but I hope Carl's right and if the APA can ever make hay, now is the time to do it.

DAL 88 Driver

You make it sound so simple. All we have to do is yell, "Our Goal is Restoration!", click our heels, and voila!, everything will be back to the way it should be! Right? Wrong!

Okay, I know that's not what you think. So why don't you (not just you, but others too) stop trying to make it sound like that's what I think?

Here's something you apparently don't know (or maybe you do know it but it just doesn't fit your support for DALPA?). Any successful business or organization sets appropriate goals and objectives. That's a starting point for developing strategies to accomplish those goals and objectives. It's "Business 101" stuff. Our MEC has not done this. Or if they have, they've certainly made it a well kept secret.... which is in and of itself a problem because of the need to get us all on board and pulling in the same direction.

Bottom line... do you really think we can accomplish something as huge as restoration without defining it as a goal? Do you think our MEC leaders can just go about quietly working towards restoration without telling any of us (or anyone else) and actually achieve it? I guess anything's possible, but that would be pretty darned unorthodoxed and goes against fundamental, time tested concepts of achieving success. If you're comfortable with rolling the dice on something that defies logic like that, more power to ya. But I'm going to stick with good, sound concepts for success when evaluating who I want representing me. So far, from what I've seen, ALPA/DALPA is a big FAIL.

Bucking Bar

DAL88,

Yours is a legitimate criticism.

I think their position is just as you wrote. Our current contract is a baseline and the "new normal." I believe they will try incremental growth based on what we have today. Perhaps they do not promote that position too much because many would be disappointed that our goals were not more aggressive.

Most likely it is simply too early in the process. I doubt we've set goals for C2012 yet. Our goals and expectations will probably be modified based on what the APA and United pilots achieve. Right now, our contract is being used as a reference in both of those negotiations.

How do we know a new union will do a better job? (honest question)

acl65pilot

You have stated repeatedly that they need to say this every time they go in to talk to the company about anything even if they KNOW they cannot achieve it. That is why I am saying it. I am too lazy to look over 50K posts to find the 30-40 times you have said it.

You know I know about business strategies. Everyone accuses this MEC administration of being to business savvy and less trade organization, so would they by pure virtue already have a strategy mapped out?
My opinion is that you need a group to peak at the right time and 15 months before an opener is way to early to start whipping us up in to a froth. There will be a time and a place for it. They will raise their battle flag if needed.
I will regress for a second. I do not know what the MEC's goals are and I do not know what this pilot group has for C2012 goals, and that makes sense to me. We will be starting those "official" surveys as soon as election season is over. My guess is that guys will want a lot all over the place, and some will state the opposite. The MEC will prepare an opener based upon this and what has transpired at APA and UCAL. I am hopeful that it does not need to be a 65% raise to hit 2004 rates. I hope it is in the ballpark of 20-30% above on of them.
The danger of doing this too early is that you may be setting your sights too low. Company making boat loads of money, awesome contracts that bring back pay, work rules, retirement and scope at these carriers in section six all come in to play for an opener. With the economy just starting to come out of the dumps it is, imo wise to wait a few more months before they start beating the war drum.

If that is an opener then it is a goal. I see no reason to state anything until that paper gets sent to DAL management. You will get immediate support for it if it is our opener. UAL, CAL and APA did not beat their war drums and state a "goal" prior to submitting their openers either.

No, they will need to communicate it at a strategic time. Not 15 months before hand.

I guess anything's possible, but that would be pretty darned unorthodoxed and goes against fundamental, time tested concepts of achieving success. If you're comfortable with rolling the dice on something that defies logic like that, more power to ya. But I'm going to stick with good, sound concepts for success when evaluating who I want representing me. So far, from what I've seen, ALPA/DALPA is a big FAIL.[/QUOTE]

DAL88,
It is ok to be frustrated. What I see as the problem that you should attack is that the majority of your fellow pilots are voting in favor of all of these agreements. Not by a few points but by at least 10 points on each vote. That is ugly proof that the majority of our pilots are happy with what this MEC and previous MEC's have brought forth from the negotiation table.

I do agree that a LEC Rep's vote should be all that needs to be said "for" or "against" a LOA or TA. I do not want to be sold on how to vote, and I agree that needs to stop. They should state why they voted yes, or no, but after that it should come down to what it means to the pilots. Let the agreement pass or fail on its merits.

Pineapple Guy

Can you explain APA's clear setting of goals, yet accomplishing nothing? I know, I know... it's only been four years. Give them time...

Swing for the fences; you might hit a home run. But its more likely you'll strike out. I'll take the consistent "singles" hitter any day.

Carl Spackler

Very well said. Great points.

Carl