Quote:
Originally Posted by satchip
So ALPA, who represented some of those non ATP certified pilots already flying for 121 carriers, should have advocated for their firing? Cause, that's what you saying....
Is that the kind of representation we can expect from you (people who wish to replace ALPA with some unnamed organization)?
No, that's absolutely not what I'm saying. I never suggested ALPA should should have "advocated for their firing." Where did you dream up that nonsense? You're trying to put words in my mouth to make your point. Fail on your part.
Is "firing" the only option? How about those pilots who lack experience go out and get some more experience and
THEN come back to fly the traveling public around??? You think that would've been a reasonable alternative? 1500 hours is NOT a lot of flying time.
The issue is whether ALPA supports a higher standard or not. Do they or don't they? "One Level of Safety" apparently is just a slogan. When it comes down to application, featherbedding is more important. Gotta avoid those "undue burdens" eh? That's more important than avoiding a smoking hole. Got it.
Another reasonable alternative would to have NOT SAID ANYTHING, i.e. NOT ARGUED FOR A LOWER STANDARD JUST FOR CONVENIENCE SAKE. It's too bad ALPA has an inherent conflict of interest trying to be everything to all pilot groups.
ALPA could've just kept their mouth shut and let the A4A argue that point. In the same way Moak could've just kept his yap shut about allowing knives in the cabin. Every BUT ALPA thought it was a terrible idea. Not Moak.
That's YOUR UNION. I already know what to EXPECT from them. They have a long track record of poor performance and bad decision making. Enjoy.