Exactly. The blind adherence to the Restoration mantra I'm afraid will cause us to not see the forest for the trees. Restoration, like C2K, will be temporary if we don't address the issues you brought up. Of course for the Carls of the world, that would be just fine.

 

Yes, I'm sure that would be fine with the Carl's of the world. Riiiggghhtt. How about we do both and not sacrifice one for the other. We all want to see issues handled other than restoration. How is sacrificing restoration going to improve our lot with regards to any other of these major issues.

 

I don't think he is suggesting sacrificing restoration for other issues. But it's important to remember that tunnel vision for the almight $$$ got us into this scope mess to begin with. Focus on ALL issues, & not just restoration.

 

Goody, can we see that Constitution and By-Laws posted on the web like they promised? Or haven't they got 20% yet?

Who's on the financial oversight committee? Have they posted their finances like they promised? Where's their promised transparency?

 

That is not correct. DPA in their question and answer section posted a question that asked if they would be ready to represent the pilots and had enough time to build the funding needed. Their reply stated that they needed and expected to have 51 percent by the end of the year and that would allow a election in the spring and DPA representation by summer. Did they meet their own deadline?

 

Then how about at least posting the DPA reps for each base? It's still showing 7 of 9 bases with no names.

 

DPA's issue is that they do not present an organization that has the support structure that can effectively represent 12,000+ pilots on day one. It can't plain and simple. For that reason the effort is appearing amateurish to many of the guys I fly with.

They may not like what ALPA has done, but they sure as heck do not want to start over with an organization that seems to be going for the emotional response.

DPA needs to show how they are structured, finances, support structure, the contracts they have lined up for support services, the quality of those support services, the cost of those services, the rep structure, the by-laws, the political action structure, the regulatory compliance and oversight structure, the safety structure and to many more to list

They have a road map, and the reality is that a road map, though needed, is not the level of organization that is needed for 51%+ of any group of individuals to sign their future career expectations to.

If they started their drive with this level of organization and went from there it would be one thing, but the goal is to get their some day after a vote.

for DAL88;
After talking to many of my friends that I had reported who asked for their cards to returned, this was one of the major issues. They all felt their careers would be hurt by de-certifying ALPA.

 

What an amazing disconnect between the people I fly with and the people you fly with. Of the people I fly with, most have not heard of the DPA. When they hear of the effort, every single one wants to hear more or sign up. Every single one is disgusted with ALPA. The ones that aren't going to sign up for DPA are also disgusted with ALPA, they're just not sure about making the change. Not one single person is an actual ALPA fan or supporter. Not one.

This is true of the folks that don't want DPA. They don't like ALPA, but they're afraid to start over. I wonder if ALPA even cares about how weak their support is...or just that people shut up and keep sending in those dues.

None of that will matter without 51%, and sadly, it's looking like they may not have it. Now what will folks like you do? Are you developing your spin to explain away how the new DALPA chairman writes a two page letter and never mentions the need to regain Scope? How's that project of reforming ALPA from within?

Carl

 

Carl;
No spin needed, and as you know I do not speak for him. What I can tell you is that I support change from within. I support his intent on listening to the pilots and performing their will. I support getting back to basics, and that is something I have championed for a long time. Transparency is process. Nothing is simpler than that.

I want ALL pilots involved in the process. I want the process and debate to be heated and messy. That is the way it is designed to be. I want pilots compelled to get involved. Not to sit on the side line for whatever reason. It is my belief that after talking to our new Master Chair he wants involvement and education for all pilots.

We will disagree on many issues this way, but that is OK. It is part of the process. A process that has served our pilots over 75 years. Getting back to basics is what is needed.

I do not need to spin anything, the process and informed and engaged pilots should take care of what needs to be taken care of.

 

Nothing but spin there Acl. O'Malley not even mentioning the disease of Oursourcing is shocking. You can't bring yourself to say it, so you spin. Education, listening, back to basics...

Here's what you and O'Malley don't get: The education is not needed from ALPA to the members, the education is needed from the members to ALPA! It only matters what WE want. I don't give a damn what THEY want. Everone I know sees outsourcing as a scourge. O'Malley refused to mention the topic of our time. Spin on dude.

Carl