I think I was a member of that "one pilot group."

X

 

NATCA is not a CAPA member organization, although they do occasionally work together. NATCA probably spends more time working with ALPA, however.

In any case, I challenge any of the CAPA member unions to point out anything that CAPA has accomplished without ALPA leading the way.

A fine story, but just that: a story. It doesn't quite jive with the facts.

I'm currently a member of a CAPA member union, the NPA. Unfortunately, I'm all too familiar with the worthlessness of CAPA.

CAPA could possibly cease being useless if the organization would change the way it does business. Unanimous consent is no way for an organization to get anything done. It basically limits CAPA to only working on safety and security issues, because you can never get the full CAPA BOD to unanimously agree on just about anything else. Even a 2/3 majority requirement would be a step in the right direction, but requiring unanimous consent to take a position on an issue is a prohibitive policy.

 

Did they give any specifics? Is this something that's in motion right now, or something that could easily happen in the future?

X

 

They did, none yet in motion but they would not be surprised to see any of them. And all have a high probabilty of success. As to the specifics, yes, they were mentioned. I hope you'll understand that discussing them would cause some here to go running back to ALPA and would compromise jobs of some very good, hard working people.

 

A fine story, but just that: a story. It doesn't quite jive with the facts.

Yet another case of, "If Todd wasn't there, it didn't happen."


I'm currently a member of a CAPA member union, the NPA. Unfortunately, I'm all too familiar with the worthlessness of CAPA.

Let's see, that would be AirTran? The fact that your in house union is in disarray and you've been through what, FIVE negotiating committees and can't figure out how to move forward, is CAPA's fault? That's like a teenager crashing the family car and blaming his parents for leaving gas in the tank! Your in house union's problems are yours, not CAPA's. According to the statements in the press, that's why IBT took a pass on AirTran; they said you needed to get your own house in order first before joining another union. In other words, why should they inherit your mess and try to sort it out when you can't do it yourself?

You left an ALPA regional carrier for AirTran because you wanted a bigger jet than an RJ and you knew what the problems were. Is CAPA your registered bargaining agent or is NPA?

CAPA could possibly cease being useless if the organization would change the way it does business. Unanimous consent is no way for an organization to get anything done. It basically limits CAPA to only working on safety and security issues, because you can never get the full CAPA BOD to unanimously agree on just about anything else. Even a 2/3 majority requirement would be a step in the right direction, but requiring unanimous consent to take a position on an issue is a prohibitive policy.[/quote]

This is an interesting charge, because ALPA adopted the unanimous consent concept a few years back. Instead of having reasoned and sometimes heated debate over issues that sometimes led to numerous division of the house and roll call votes, they went to a practice that turned the BOD and other meetings into rubber stamp events. Why? To save money. The result was predictable and with the "A" (legacy carriers and FDX) having the 51% majority, guess who will be left at the altar?

And yes, my error on the controller groups. I meant PATCO, who still represents controllers as well as NATCA.

 

Actually, we have figured out how to move forward: by bringing in ALPA and putting together a functioning structure. (And I think it's only four negotiating committees, but who's counting? )

In house unions are incapable of having any significant influence in DC on their own. That's where CAPA is supposed to enter the picture, but CAPA hasn't been effective in the slightest.

All absolutely false. Did you miss the Age-65 vote? Done by roll-call vote at the EB level, and passed by 80%, with some members splitting their roll-call votes. Hardly a unanimous consent concept. Very different than CAPA.

PATCO isn't a CAPA member union, either.

 

.


Quote:
This is an interesting charge, because ALPA adopted the unanimous consent concept a few years back. Instead of having reasoned and sometimes heated debate over issues that sometimes led to numerous division of the house and roll call votes, they went to a practice that turned the BOD and other meetings into rubber stamp events. Why? To save money. The result was predictable and with the "A" (legacy carriers and FDX) having the 51% majority, guess who will be left at the altar?
All absolutely false. Did you miss the Age-65 vote? Done by roll-call vote at the EB level, and passed by 80%, with some members splitting their roll-call votes. Hardly a unanimous consent concept. Very different than CAPA.

The first roll call vote in YEARS...the move took place years ago when you were still in high school. Oh, I forgot, you were an MEC member then too, right?

 

Geeeez.....I retired nearly twenty years ago and it seems like some things never change. Reads like you're still having trouble with different unions. In the few years preceding my retirement, things were already starting to go downhill. I saw a lack of participation in union affaris as the root of the problem. Seemed like most pilots just sat back and expected the union to take care of itself. Well, it's no different than our government in D.C. If you don't participate in the election process and don't keep "up to speed" on what's going on, you "get what you pay for" in the long run.

Naturally, the foregoing is.....IMHO.

 

You're absolutely correct Eaglefly. The purpose is to make money and keep the ALPA National power brokers in their expensive seats in Washington. After all, it takes a LOT of dues money to pay the ALPA staff and support staff wages and more importantly, expense accounts.

After paying dues for over 15 years, I finally say the actual numbers of salaries paid to everyone from Capt. Prater on down. UNBELIEVABLE !!

In my view, the magazine isn't even worth it for wrapping fish.

Just my two cents.

S'long Mates

 

Some may call me nuts, but I don't mind paying good money to legal, safety and other staff who do the day to day heavy lifting for line pilots.

However, the National Officers and others (like the General Manager who refused to join the in house union before he was "annointed") who rake in the $$ and have expense accounts and apartments to boot...and new cars paid for by member dues...they should be paid no better than an across the board average of crewmembers. Factor in the low salaries too, not just the highest.

Hell, how about a flat rate...say $75,000.00 a year and bonuses only if they perform and meet goals that improve crewmember contracts and quality of life. Otherwise, let them live like a line pilot whose busting his ass to survive.