No, I'm saying that your post was a factless opinion. Carl you wrote; stated,

"The pilots at Hawaiin didn't buy the ALPA national scare tactics, and voted down the TA. NWA pilots and Delta pilots succumbed to the scare tactics and voted in their first TA's."

That's a factless opinion.

 

That's yet another factless opinion.

 

Here's the part where you lied:

I've never advocated any such thing. Not repeatedly, not ever. You're lying about it.

You're lying again. If you had found such posts, you would prove me wrong. The posts don't exist. That's why I say that you've lied about this.

Carl

 

There is some opinion in there to be sure, so I'll strip out all the opinion and just leave the facts:

The pilots at Hawaiian voted down their first TA in the bk process, and voted for the second TA which included better provisions than the first.

The pilots at NWA/DAL voted for their first TA in the bk process.

Carl

 

That's all true, but a Local Council or MEC can only be placed in trusteeship under very extreme circumstances. It takes something on the level of financial malfeasance before someone gets placed in trusteeship. No one has ever been told that they can't negotiate for what they want to negotiate for. As for the signature of the president, that' also true, but the president will only refuse to sign if the contract violates ALPA policy in some way.

I've done work at the local, MEC, and national level in ALPA for quite some time. I've seen all of it, including the "underbelly," as you put it, and it's not anything like you try to describe. How much involvement have you had, Carl? You dodged the question last time I asked. I'm betting that you've had no involvement at all.

And if there had ever been a single case of a pilot group being told that they can't negotiate for something that they want, then you might have a point. But you don't.

The holder of the bargaining rights is irrelevant, because ALPA policy dictates that MECs set their own bargaining priorities. ALPA can't legally violate its own policies. National doesn't set bargaining priorities for MECs.

Many MECs involve outside consultants in their negotiations. Never been a problem, although I personally think that it's usually a waste of money.

 

Stop trying in include reason and facts into an emotional debate.

 

And why is that National's fault?

 

You would be wrong. In 32 years as an ALPA member with 4 airlines, I've done merger, communications, and strike committee work. Also ran for office twice and lost both times. Dealt with national a number of times.

If you would lower your self importance for a moment, you would know that I do NOT dodge questions. I'm only one line puke that gets bombarded by every ALPA apologist out there like you that posts as soon as you get your latest talking points from ALPA. Sometimes I miss an occasional question due to the volume. When I do remember to answer everything, the apologists like you come on and say that I post too much.

Again, you're just showing how ignorant you are of the process that actually occurs...policies notwithstanding.

Carl

 

[QUOTE]
I don't think anyone would want to make this argument with the NMB. A contract is not considered legal unless signed by ALPA. The MEC's or Negotiating Committees signatures are not binding. This is why some contracts are delayed, because there are sometimes issues that need to have the language massaged and the leverage is the refusal of ALPA to sign off until it's done.

If you are still unsure, call the NMB and ask them if your MEC is your legally recognized bargaining agent.



Consultants? Yes. The Wilson Center is an excellent example of a very good outside group.

Professional negotiators? No. That's not to say ALPA does not have professional negotiators; they do and they do a fine job. They also face pressure from their bosses to get the job done and keep the cost down.

 

If you're going to post here acl, you've got to pay attention. Stay off those ALPA talking points for a moment and try to remember the different conversations going on here. To wit:

ALPA apologists here were talking about what a great job everyone did during bankruptcy, and how everyone had no choice during the 1113C process. Someone else posted that it wasn't true and that Hawaiian pilots showed how you could turn down the first TA in the bk process, and get a much better deal with the second TA. ALPA apologists came on and told me that it was just my factless opinion. I stripped out all opinion and just stated the facts that Hawaiian pilots turned down their first TA, and accepted the second TA which contained much better language. NWA and DAL pilots accepted their first TA's.

Nowhere did I say or infer that any of that was ALPA national's fault.

Carl