Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 982287)
Look at the factual history. To the extent there was a conflict of interest (Comair and ASA's complaint about CY2K's scope restrictions) ALPA fought on the side of the Delta pilots.
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 982287)
I think it odd that the DPA crowd jumps on board this "conflict of interest" issue when the facts clearly show that when there is a conflict, it has been resolved in OUR favor.
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 982287)
As far as our scope sales go, you need only look as far as your own MEC, your own Reps and your own pilots' voting record. Comair did not negotiate our outsourcing. WE DID.
Carl |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 982295)
Advocating a new group without the willingness to employ the most basic vehicle that exists today confuses me.
Fixing ALPA from within is not possible. Why? Because ALPA is convinced it does not need to be fixed. Besides, when this thread began, I challenged you to go ahead and fix ALPA from within. You accepted. How's that been going? Carl |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 982313)
I guess that is what concerns/confuses me. No one is willing to get involved with the current union, so the answer is an alternate one where the majority on here conclude the apathy will not be the same after a year or two? I see a disconnect in that logic.
Can we at least understand each other on that one simple point? Can you at least stop making false straw man arguments against this one simple point? Carl |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 982522)
It could be locked if the need arose, but I still think that there are some decent ideas floating around on this thread. :eek: There I said it. :D
|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 982582)
Here's what you're missing Bar: That was a decade ago when the majority of ALPA members were pilots that flew for the majors, and the regionals were largely not ALPA members. Today, the majority of ALPA members are Regional Pilots;
Carl Care to post some numbers? Last I checked, the numbers were overwhelmingly mainline, as is our EVP structure. Also, the two of the largest groups of regional pilots are unrepresented (SkyWest) and represented by Teamsters (Republic). Since 2007 I'd go as far as to say the numbers at the ALPA represented regionals have declined while mainline has grown slightly. Eagle and ASA are probably the two largest ALPA regionals, which together do not have half the seniority list we do here at Delta. The biggest change in the balance was the defection of US Air. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 982687)
Carl,
Care to post some numbers? Last I checked, the numbers were overwhelmingly mainline, as is our EVP structure. Also, the two of the largest groups of regional pilots are unrepresented (SkyWest) and represented by Teamsters (Republic). Since 2007 I'd go as far as to say the numbers at the ALPA represented regionals have declined while mainline has grown slightly. Eagle and ASA are probably the two largest ALPA regionals, which together do not have half the seniority list we do here at Delta. The biggest change in the balance was the defection of US Air. A year or two ago, we were having this same discussion on the DALPA Forum. Guys were saying that over half of ALPA was regional pilots. I ran the numbers at the time and, while it didn't quite add up to half, it wasn't all that far off. The regional numbers may have declined somewhat since then. But I'll bet regionals are still a huge chunk of the membership of ALPA. And they represent pretty much the only source of future members for ALPA. I suspect this is the reason we're seeing such reluctance to fight for our scope. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 982521)
Depends. If the support was for the internal effort was wall thought out, wanted to work within the system, and was organized, I bet you would see more support.
Many of the pilots I talk to agree that change within ALPA needs to happen. They want the change, but as part of ALPA, not as an independent. One Captain I flew with brought up PPA which was a drive before half the list was here. He comment was, "Fool me once...." The point is that he does not trust these independent movements because of what was the underlying motivators on the last one. Ergo, he feels the same this time. This is what I have run in to many times in conversation. Most will not even give an independent a second thought. ALPA warts and all provides services that are second to none. There is no denying it. Find a pilot that has had their job protected by those services, and you find someone that, though critical of some of ALPA's actions prefers to remodel the current house than tear it down and build a new one. This is what, it would serve those involved within DPA to work within the system under an organized effort. If every one or most within ALPA have nefarious intentions like some purport, the damage inflicted to get the masses to see would be so great, that any union would that would be successful in throwing out ALPA would be largely ineffective. Therefore, it is wise to work under the current system and affect the change you want. Sometimes it works sometimes it does not. Carl |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 982525)
Yes and no. A LEC can send out communication that goes around the MEC, but in reality the checks that the MEC Communications committee are generally grammatical in nature, and also make sure the content is correct and legally sound.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 982687)
Carl,
Care to post some numbers? Last I checked, the numbers were overwhelmingly mainline, as is our EVP structure. Also, the two of the largest groups of regional pilots are unrepresented (SkyWest) and represented by Teamsters (Republic). Since 2007 I'd go as far as to say the numbers at the ALPA represented regionals have declined while mainline has grown slightly. Eagle and ASA are probably the two largest ALPA regionals, which together do not have half the seniority list we do here at Delta. The biggest change in the balance was the defection of US Air. But the rest of my statement still stands. ALPA defended our contracts when we were the vast majority of its members. Now we're only 7,000 pilots apart. What ALPA did in 2000 is clear and you are correct. But what ALPA is doing NOW is also clear. You just don't seem to want to see the clear evidence of non-support for majors' scope clauses. Carl |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 982687)
Carl,
Care to post some numbers? Last I checked, the numbers were overwhelmingly mainline, as is our EVP structure. Also, the two of the largest groups of regional pilots are unrepresented (SkyWest) and represented by Teamsters (Republic). Since 2007 I'd go as far as to say the numbers at the ALPA represented regionals have declined while mainline has grown slightly. Eagle and ASA are probably the two largest ALPA regionals, which together do not have half the seniority list we do here at Delta. The biggest change in the balance was the defection of US Air. There is a small minority of pilots who want to risk the side effects of scope recapture and it's probably less than 10% of the pilots at mainline. (Also, most senior regional pilots are opposed to any such action) This is not enough for ALPA or DALPA to take action. We would all love it if mainline management would park the RJ's or start operating them at the mainline, this just simply isn't reality. There is way too much capital tied up into regional carriers to simply start doing this and there is no known legal course to force management to take that route. So the risk is real that a scope recapture would involve some sort of SLI with regional carriers resulting in regional pilots receiving windfalls at the expense of mainline pilots. In the long run this would benefit all pilots, however, the short term turmoil would be too much for any union to survive unscathed. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:44 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands