Originally Posted by Purple Drank

Allow me to shift gears for a moment.

I'm curious as to whether this discussion, in various forms and on various threads, is making a dent. There are half a dozen guys on each side gunning hard for their causes. As for me, there is nothing anyone can say to make me think ALPA belongs on the property. And others feel the same way about the DPA.

I'd like to ask any lurkers to please weigh in. Has this back-and-forth actually resulted in any converts one way or the other? Does this discussion matter for anyone on the fence? Is anyone here actually on the fence?

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

FWIW, my statement was that WN management had not shown "MUCH" interest in outsourcing, not no interest. You and Sink drastically changed what I said with that single word change.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

Their management also has shown very little interest in outsourcing. That is key and how their scope got where it is.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

I don't know man, here's what you said earlier today:



Sounds to me like you were buying into the narrative that SWAPA has what they have because they've never faced a scope challenge by management. SWA management fought them for over 18 months over Volaris and code share during Section 6 negotiations that took 3 years. SWAPA settled by taking less of a pay raise in order to tighten their scope language.

18 months of management fighting you over trying to weaken your scope can hardly be characterized as not showing "MUCH" interest by management in your scope.

Just sayin.

Carl

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

I'd like to ask any lurkers to please weigh in. Has this back-and-forth actually resulted in any converts one way or the other? Does this discussion matter for anyone on the fence? Is anyone here actually on the fence?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

As stated previously, you add bullet points in your laundry list claiming to prove what's wrong with the DPA constitution. Yet fully half of the items in your laundry list are NOT in the DPA constitution. You've just made it up

But I urge you to continue posting newer and newer laundry lists of items that are provably wrong. It's good for people to see ALPA debating skills at their best.

Carl

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

Allow me to shift gears for a moment.

I'm curious as to whether this discussion, in various forms and on various threads, is making a dent. There are half a dozen guys on each side gunning hard for their causes. As for me, there is nothing anyone can say to make me think ALPA belongs on the property. And others feel the same way about the DPA.

I'd like to ask any lurkers to please weigh in. Has this back-and-forth actually resulted in any converts one way or the other? Does this discussion matter for anyone on the fence? Is anyone here actually on the fence?

Originally Posted by hitimefurl

I've laid out my cards and you've chosen to insult, cajole and call anyone who has a question a liar. Calling someone a liar and saying nothing they said is true is not a debate. Why don't you go back to L&G if you are unable or unwilling to discuss this topic without resorting to 5th grade cyber bullying.

Originally Posted by hitimefurl

My main issue is that the DPA Constitution is flawed IMHO. The DPA is claiming to be a better ALPA. There are major changes to the Constitution that I do not agree with.

Here are my bullet points in support:

• DPA announces dues will be lowered to anywhere between 1%-1.75% depending on where you read the website yet the constitution says they will go up from first year target of 1.65% without MEMRAT to 2.25% (Edit: Carl disagrees on date in spite of DPA declaration to open early) or a minimum of 2% for Section 6. A merger also triggers this. ALPA can't raise dues today without a vote.
• They say that FPL is bad yet they increased FPL for all volunteers including those that don't get FPL like that today over today's limits and pay for it out of the budget since they will take that money value assigned to the contract and spread it amongst the pilots. No, wait, make that the reps as the FPL is going up the money would go to them not the CBA.
• USAPA payed over $7 million in legal fees to SSM&P in less than 4 years after the vote. SSMP&P is charging 50% of their $250 fee, per their contract, with the rest outstanding after certification, yet the DPA has mysteriously paid a number so small that it can only be called incidental costs from the DPA logs. Where's the legal bill?
• There's a second law firm on the DPA books that has charged more to the DPA than SSM&P so far. Who could that be possible?
• New hires, pilots returning from disability and MILOA can't be reps for 2 years, nor could a pilot from a merged airline because of the 2 year good standing rule
• New hires have to pay a maintenance fee their first year. Not about money, right?
• Look through the USAPA LM2 and see the 6 figure employees they have. You want to know why? That's what good help costs today.
• "A contract which is understandable, enforceable and beneficial to both parties and should not exceed 200 pages." Really? Beneficial to the company? An iron clad 200 pages?
• Voting on everything and everybody. Where will you find the time?
• 25% of the pilots in a block to get a resolution passed vs simply majority at an LEC today? Harder to use the pilots will.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo

That's the problem, Carl, you don't prove me wrong, you obfuscate, change the subject and launch into personal attacks. These are the facts; ALPA merger policy changes very infrequently and when it does change it is through a time tested process that is incredibly inclusive. In the end it is affirmed through multiple democratic votes. The idea that one small group can hijack the process is just false. That is what you are pushing and that is what you have to try to run away from.

For the younger guys on here, I hope you notice the pattern. Carl is someone who never has to take responsibility for his diatribes. When his type of tactics are found to be failures, he simply packs up, insults anyone who disagrees with him, and then moves on to his next attacks.

If anyone reading this has not read the UAL/CAL arbitration award you should read it today, twice. What you see is a definitive rejection of the type of extreme positions that the Carls in this world push for. Taking extreme positions is not a sign of strength, it is a sign of weakness. If you are in a leadership position, it is very seductive to adopt this type of extreme position. You can thump your chest and make yourself look tough for a few minutes, but in the end you will fail. In general, those weak leaders then try to find scapegoats; "the game was rigged" "the refs screwed us" "it's not fair". The excuses are endless but they always end up having to make up excuses. Go back and let me know how many $$$ that Lloyd "meet you at the gates of hell" Hill returned to American pilots. How has USAPA done with their lofty promises and tough talk?

Does anyone doubt that the "Carls" at Airtran read the first TA from their merger committee and were shouting to the heavens that this was a travesty and that if we voted it down the next offer would be much, much better. Now those same "Carls" are probably suing ALPA claiming it's all ALPA's fault.

Carl pushed for an extreme solution in the DAL/NWA case. Using DOH produced a list grossly distorted in favor of him and his fellow pilots. For a while, Carl is applauded. Then when this position has left his fellow pilots without a say in the final list, he starts in with the accusations and attacks. The game was rigged, it's all Lee Moak's fault, etc. etc. etc. Now Carl spends his time trying to tear everything down because he is mad that the world didn't treat him fairly.

Read the arbitration award and see how impressed the arbitrators were with extreme positions. Tell me how much those positions played out in the final award. Now we have the Carls trying to tell us that the game was rigged because United fixed the rules before kickoff. Nice excuses, but that doesn't help anyone does it, it just spreads blame.

These DPA guys are just the same way, what a luring message. Hey, ALPA is the reason why this last decade has sucked for the piloting profession. Vote for me and I will make it all better. The fact that these guys have never done anything, never taken responsibility for anything makes it so easy for them to claim victory.

I know there are a few young guys on this board who are now on the MEC. My guess is that they are quickly finding out that there are no easy answers. Pithy attacks and personal insults get you nowhere, but they sound cool. Contract negotiations are about 95% dictated by statistics and analysis. Steely nerve has very little to do with it.

So if you don't care when your next contract is signed, if you don't care what the next seniority integration at Delta looks like then please by all means adopt these extreme positions. They will work just as well tomorrow as they have for the last 10 years. When the CAL committee presented a seniority list with 2,800+ United pilots stapled to the bottom, I am sure the Carls in the world applauded and hoisted them onto their shoulders. Tough talk, hard bargaining, big balls. In the end they might as well have given the Board a slip of paper saying "I don't have any meaningful input, so you go figure out what the list should look like."

Maybe you young guys want to have that experience. Maybe we should all start pre-writing our excuses about why we got skunked in the next SLI arbitration. Carl doesn't care because he will be golden. Hell, I don't have anything to worry about either. If it does matter to you, go read that arbitration award right now, and then figure out what types of tactics you want to follow in the future. Would you rather succeed or spend your time writing creative excuses about why you failed? Your choice.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Having fun can be hard work.

Flew over to a friend's grand opening event at PDK. Had no idea a new Cirrus could be a $850,000 airplane. Yeegads. But wow, they are comfortable. Air conditioning that works .... amazing.

Meanwhile we taxied back to the runway in our airplane with every door and window open, kids trying to scoop air with their little hands cupped in the vents ... it's hot .... .

Originally Posted by alfaromeo

That's the problem, Carl, you don't prove me wrong, you obfuscate, change the subject and launch into personal attacks. These are the facts; ALPA merger policy changes very infrequently and when it does change it is through a time tested process that is incredibly inclusive. In the end it is affirmed through multiple democratic votes. The idea that one small group can hijack the process is just false. That is what you are pushing and that is what you have to try to run away from.

For the younger guys on here, I hope you notice the pattern. Carl is someone who never has to take responsibility for his diatribes. When his type of tactics are found to be failures, he simply packs up, insults anyone who disagrees with him, and then moves on to his next attacks.

If anyone reading this has not read the UAL/CAL arbitration award you should read it today, twice. What you see is a definitive rejection of the type of extreme positions that the Carls in this world push for. Taking extreme positions is not a sign of strength, it is a sign of weakness. If you are in a leadership position, it is very seductive to adopt this type of extreme position. You can thump your chest and make yourself look tough for a few minutes, but in the end you will fail. In general, those weak leaders then try to find scapegoats; "the game was rigged" "the refs screwed us" "it's not fair". The excuses are endless but they always end up having to make up excuses. Go back and let me know how many $$$ that Lloyd "meet you at the gates of hell" Hill returned to American pilots. How has USAPA done with their lofty promises and tough talk?

Does anyone doubt that the "Carls" at Airtran read the first TA from their merger committee and were shouting to the heavens that this was a travesty and that if we voted it down the next offer would be much, much better. Now those same "Carls" are probably suing ALPA claiming it's all ALPA's fault.

Carl pushed for an extreme solution in the DAL/NWA case. Using DOH produced a list grossly distorted in favor of him and his fellow pilots. For a while, Carl is applauded. Then when this position has left his fellow pilots without a say in the final list, he starts in with the accusations and attacks. The game was rigged, it's all Lee Moak's fault, etc. etc. etc. Now Carl spends his time trying to tear everything down because he is mad that the world didn't treat him fairly.

Read the arbitration award and see how impressed the arbitrators were with extreme positions. Tell me how much those positions played out in the final award. Now we have the Carls trying to tell us that the game was rigged because United fixed the rules before kickoff. Nice excuses, but that doesn't help anyone does it, it just spreads blame.

These DPA guys are just the same way, what a luring message. Hey, ALPA is the reason why this last decade has sucked for the piloting profession. Vote for me and I will make it all better. The fact that these guys have never done anything, never taken responsibility for anything makes it so easy for them to claim victory.

I know there are a few young guys on this board who are now on the MEC. My guess is that they are quickly finding out that there are no easy answers. Pithy attacks and personal insults get you nowhere, but they sound cool. Contract negotiations are about 95% dictated by statistics and analysis. Steely nerve has very little to do with it.

So if you don't care when your next contract is signed, if you don't care what the next seniority integration at Delta looks like then please by all means adopt these extreme positions. They will work just as well tomorrow as they have for the last 10 years. When the CAL committee presented a seniority list with 2,800+ United pilots stapled to the bottom, I am sure the Carls in the world applauded and hoisted them onto their shoulders. Tough talk, hard bargaining, big balls. In the end they might as well have given the Board a slip of paper saying "I don't have any meaningful input, so you go figure out what the list should look like."

Maybe you young guys want to have that experience. Maybe we should all start pre-writing our excuses about why we got skunked in the next SLI arbitration. Carl doesn't care because he will be golden. Hell, I don't have anything to worry about either. If it does matter to you, go read that arbitration award right now, and then figure out what types of tactics you want to follow in the future. Would you rather succeed or spend your time writing creative excuses about why you failed? Your choice.