And why doesn't the MEC explain this clearly - including "the intent of the contract" because the intent seems quite the opposite to me.

How could the greatest legal labor minds in the known universe have written the contract to read one way, but intend it another?

There is something fishier here than intent and I'm not looking for some conspiracy. If there is a secret handshake going on between the MEC and Mgmt, okay, but dont play the "intent" and "insufficient case law" card, it doesnt fly.

 

With the highest subscription price going !!! former ALPA so I can weigh in.

 

I am not afraid of anything. I do however want the best possible contract and quality of life for my family. I personally don't feel DPA can deliver that. If you feel they can then I respect your right to support them.
You seem to believe that ALPA was responsible for all the ills you mentioned. I think your being naive. If as a example anyone things that age 65 was not a done deal after ICAO went to 65 and the FAA agreed that pilots could fly in the US over 65 they are not facing reality. There was zero chance that a court decision overturning age 60 was not imminent. Had that happened you not only would have had 65 but pilots over 60 returning back to work. ALPA made the best of a bad situation.

You mention no scope fight and that is far from the truth. Your focusing on one the RAH issue. They has not been a fight because as I posted in another thread its not what the contracts intent is. This is established by both term sheets, negotiators notes and past practice. This practice goes all the way back to the early 90's. We can't win this issue under this contract so there is no point in wasting time and effort. It would also cause a loss of credibility with the NMB since the issue was decided long ago. The fight on this issue has to be in the next contract. Feel out your survey accordingly.

Retirement- The Delta DB planned had 5 billion in obligations and just over 1 billion in assets. DALPA with assistance from ALPA put together a package that produces more value for Delta pilots then perhaps any other situation in history where a plan has been terminated. I am the poster child for a dead zoner. I will recover at least 70 percent of what I had earned and accrued on the DB plan. Many pilots will see more under the new plans then the old plan. To compare you have to add in the PBGC money, MPP plan lump sum, Note lump Sum and DC plan going forward. You might also add in the claim money and merger money but I will leave that out of my personal calculations. I am reasonable happy with the way it turned out. It could have been far far worse but for the actions of Dalpa. Working for a company that nearly liquidates and reorganizes under chapter 11 sucks. We came out quite well compared to most employee groups going through that process.
Its easy to look back over the last 10 years and point fingers at ALPA. They have made their share of mistakes however to try and paint ALPA as the cause of the ills of the last 10 years is a complete ignorance of reality.
ALPA did not cause 911. ALPA does not control oil prices. ALPA did not aide SW management in procuring 5 billion in fuel hedges that lead to the later meltdown in 04/05 for many airlines. ALPA did not cause the US recession. ALPA did not invade IRAQ the second time. ALPA did not write the Constitution which was going to lead to a very bad court decision. I can go on and on. 2000 to 2010 will be remembered as perhaps the worst decade for workers outside of the great depression. ALPA did not cause it.

 

And yet alpa still hasn't and wont ever publish it's stance on scope! It's a conflict of interest and the issue will always be deflected.

 

That's the biggest reason most guys I fly with consider DPA. It's painfully obvious to most guys that ALPA has conflict of interest.

 

That's the crux of it, ladies. Sailing?

 

Sailing;

Do you think ALPA has a conflict of interest with regard to regionals and majors?

Do you think I blamed ALPA for 911 and the Gulf wars?

 

A) Good to see you around underboob king.

B) The notion we all look back and blame poor innocent ALPA National for all that has gone wrong in the world, rather, you just look at how it could be with SWAPA's pay and scope and you look at what ALPA is offering and then look back to see their track record [and try to be an optimist that expensive MEC functions in Manhattan were somehow justifiable] and you can't justify throwing money after bad.

Again, not really interested in working within the system when you can't even directly elect your own MEC Chairman. And not willing to work within a system where mainline pilots and regional lifers both can come to agreement on the fact that ALPA cannot represent both in good faith.

 

If you want to change how the MEC is elected, you need to let your reps know.

 

So how's APA's direct election system workinng out? Go back and read Bate's letter to his pilots, then some of their Domicile reps letters. Then tell me again why you'd want that plan here.

Alfaromeo has written a few times about this subject. You might want to peruse his posts for some background on how your desired method inhibits delivering results to your wallet.