SpecialTracking

30west,
Thank you for the insight.

osuav8r

I'm LCAL and Chuck was one of the few guys on my no fly list. I'm amazed he's ever been a union rep. I realize not everyone likes everyone, but I really didn't like him on a personal level and I've heard nothing but good things about Brad, so that's where my vote's going!

baseball

Not so black and white world my friend. More like grey. But, the real and I mean sticky wicket is when the law suits get filed they get filed in black and white because the pilots who were represented are black and blue from being abused by management without a proper and uniform standard of care.

ALPA's franchises of union MEC's are not unlike hospitals who provide services to patients. They insure a certain degree of conformity and uniformity in terms of standard of care. Just because my neighborhood has never had a hospital that doesn't mean that when one opens up I shouldn't get a minimum level of standard of care.

What about Taco Bell? Taco Bell isn't going to allow a new restaurant in Okulmugee Oklahoma to make their own recipe for their Burrito Supreme. They will insist upon conformity to the norm, so that the same wonderful and joyful experience of eating the burrito supreme can be enjoyed from sea to shining sea. That joy can only be achieved by following the same black and white recipe that all Taco Bell's are required to use.

I disagree with the 18 years portion of your post. The real problem was not exactly in NOT having a union or ALPA on property. I really believe it was two fold: One; ALPA forgave the scabs at CAL, and second, the scabs ran the union at CAL since they were such a powerful demographic post 9-11 (due to furloughed MIGS/voting members gone).

Just a question please: Did ALPA forgive all scabs for the strikes or just some?

Now an opinion: Continental had no union from 83 to roughly 94. Somewhere during that time the pilots determined that management could really do what it wanted and decided, albeit however grateful for their jobs that they were, that they still needed something. The "ops group" was born. This ramshackle band of merry men were the face of the pilot group to management. They had about as much authority as a warm cup of spit. Eventually Rene Menjares and a few others formed the IACP. This group, our first union since Lorenzo broke the strike and broke ALPA was successful in getting two contracts to the CAL and CAL Express pilots. However, the union would not have existed unless Rene courted the CAL Express pilots and gave them equal standing in the union. It was really the CAL Express pilots that showed the CAL pilots how a union should work and what a union does. For the CAL Express pilots had zero scabs, and at that time, CAL had over a thousand. There simply were not enough votes to form a union at that time without CAL Express pilots.

However, after the furloughs post 9-11 those CAL Express pilots were at the bottom of the CAL seniority list, and Express was sold and spun off, so their votes were now gone. The scabs really came to power within the MEC and ran the MEC from 2001-2005. It wasn't until the furloughee's came back onto property and became a voting power again that the CAL MEC started to purge the scabs from committee's and MEC power.

All of the damage that was done, and I mean all of it that was put in black and white, or enforced, or language that was not enforced, or LoA's, or side deals, or whatever...was done between late 2001 and late 2005, when the scabs ran the CAL MEC. All of the legal mess we are trying to clean up now resulted from a total lack of institutional control over the MEC during a time when Jay Panarello (scab) ran the MEC and had his buddies like Bruce Stone (scab), AJ Bertuli (scab), Bob Shoemaker (scab). His friendly scabs from CLE and GUM (forgot names), Their training dept rep (scab forgot name), etc. All of these guys were scabs and ran the union. Not just members, but full up leadership. Then, look at the negotiating committee. Mark Farrow (scab), Pierce, Muir, Zullo, Martin, Stivala. We had the People's Express FMR's who really didn't know anything about anything other than they loved PBS and we were going to get that forced upon us in contract '02 weather we liked it or not.

We actually were allowed to vote on Contract '02, an ALPA contract with section 25 missing. It said "to be inserted at a later date." The reps that cast the deciding votes on that, and not to send section 25 out to a vote to the pilots were Gustitus and Sebastianelli. We got stuck with a scheduling section (the most important section in the entire cba) with no oversight from ALPA.

I am sorry, but the black and white world I live in requires me to pay greenbacks to ALPA, and not my local council, and not my MEC. The lawsuits that get filed are from lack of institutional control from National. The ALPA tool box is the same at DAL as it is as UAL. The burrito supreme is the same in MCO as it is in MSY. How and why ALPA allowed many of these train wrecks to occur, while their lawyers were in the room, present at the table, and while giving advice and counsel is a mystery to me. I know...It's just advice and counsel. But, I also know that we need to insure a certain standard of care when we're all "in this together." and all members of the same union.

It's the reason we went ALPA in the first place. We wanted the same standard of care, the same level of service, the same level and type of representation that other carriers/pilot groups were being given. Our dues moneys were collected and used to aid and assist other carriers, other causes of action, other legislative agendas. We shouldn't be the red-headed step child, nor treated that way. If ALPA takes dues money from it's military members, then ALPA should represent them properly. If ALPA takes dues money from Delta pilots it should give them the same standard of care as their other affiliate members.

And, we didn't "get ALPA back on property." ALPA came to us. ALPA came to us with a full on campaign and courted and cajoled us to get back on property. I do blame the way age 65 happened on CAL and the CAL MEC. For it was a CAL pilot, John Prater who really pushed that down our throats even though the pilot group didn't really support it.

One thing I fear is that although the pilots don't support any further increases in the flying age limit, ALPA isn't getting those LTD over-payments back to the pilots because one thing I hear the lawyers say is "what if the age limit goes up again, we're gonna need those over-payments." Is this a red herring? Is this a signal from ALPA that they will allow this to happen? I can see it now, the senior pilots coalition gets re-born and convinces ALPA not only to allow it, but to support it legislatively. It would be better for all concerned for ALPA to simply sue on behalf of the pilots to have those over-payments returned, whatever the actual, or near actual dollar amounts are/were. The reason there is confusion, or as some say..."dishonesty" in presenting the numbers is because the benefit (unlike the CAL pilots A fund) was not frozen. I can see how some pilots would say...so and so is lying about the numbers, etc. But, the benefit was not frozen, therefore you get some skewing of the math.

Ottolillienthal

All of what you say is true.

I would like to focus a bit on the future. If there is a chance that ALPA will support any future age increases in the flying age that is a deal-breaker for me.

As I recall it, it was John Prater, Fred Stankovich, Fred Abbot, who all asserted influence over interim FAA administrator Bobby Sturgel to back-door approval of age 65. Word on the street that EWR Chief Pilot Stank was good friends with Sturgel through their relationship and friendship from their Navy days. Abbot used Prater to leverage ALPA support and leverage this relationship to push for age 65. Prior to age 65 approval, all over-age 60, and non-current and qualified CAL Captains that Abbot wanted to thank and reward for breaking the strike were hidden in a secret squadron in the training dept. Upwards of 30 "flight instructors" were given the unique ability to return to their line captain positions where as other pilots in other pilot groups were not. Only those part 121 Captains managed by the IAH FSDO (certificate management office) of the FAA were allowed to do so.

Captains at United, Delta, American, World, etc, all had their check airman letters suspended by the FAA upon turning age 60 on Feb 13, 2007, which was the date of implementation. At the grievance hearing in Houston, the LC 171 rep filed a group grievance on behalf of all, and it was thrown out. ALPA really didn't support the grievance, but check airman letters were exhibited and one could see the different interpretation from the FAA at the Houston CMO, that was happening at all the other FAA 121 CMO's.

It would really be best if we don't go through this again. I say return the overpayments, as that would incentivize ALPA in to NOT supporting any future age changes to the law. Enough is enough. ALPA collected the moneys through it's CBA and through it negotiating on behalf of CAL pilots to come up with, develop, and implement the LTD plan. ALPA should insure all over payments are returned.

baseball

I think looking forward is wise. But, to look forward we need to remember what's in the rear view mirror. Didn't all of this happen because of some obscure question and answer document posted on the FAA website by Bobby Sturgel? I think I recall that CAL management actually wrote the q and a and had the FAA rubber stamp it and use it as a governing document. I remember the document was revised after 3 months of appearing on their website. Question number 12 or 13 I think it was and the answer was later expunged, and then a month later Bobby Sturgel was gone. But, the damage was done....Then the grievance happened somewhere in that time frame, but after the elvel 2 hearing question 13 was removed. Something funny about that timing. lobbying-legislation-relationships, then the law, then the special squadron of hidden instructors, then their returned line status, then the grievance, then the q and a, then amendment of q and a, then defeat of grievance, then removal of Sturgel, then Prater's failed re-election. I don't know....I hope we don't do this again.

Normally you can google anything, but I can't seem to find the original FAA Q/A that was published. Anyone have it? When was the first and last time the FAA published a QA to implement an NPRM?

tailwheel48

Actually, I support Chuck because I've seen his union work for over twenty years. He saved more pilots careers than anybody I know. I also know that he was taken out of the job purely because of his legacy heritage.

Typical ALPA hypocrisy at work.

XHooker

"Word on the street" is wrong. First, Stank was a Marine, did a tour with the Blues, went to PE in the early 80s and is about 70 now. "Speed" Sturgell was Navy, flew F-14s, did a Topgun tour, went to UAL, and is about 56. No military overlap. Next, while the instructor carve out reeked like week old rotting mackerel, many, probably most, of those instructors were not scabs and Abbott, while I'm sure he had no problems using scabs to his advantage, being PE, I seriously doubt he had any love for them, either.

SpecialTracking

Regardless of what has been accomplished in the past, comments like these are disqualifying and prevent us from collectively moving forward.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...................................

"Remember: You can change your vote at any time. Don't miss this last chance to have an L-CAL pilot in there fighting for what is yours."

"Breaking news: With the possible closure of CLE L-CAL pilots will now lose even more representation at the MEC. My election to the MEC is more important than ever if you want to ensure your voice is heard."

"I will fight equally hard for an L-UAL issue as long as a majority of IAH pilots want me to do so."

intrepidcv11

One thing hasn't changed with this merger. Houston is still the Melrose Place of ALPA politics.

baseball

So, you are saying, just to be clear that Sturgel and Stank were not friends? They didn't communicate at all on age 65? The word on the street is more than just word on the street. There was a definite relationship between these two individuals. I know one was Navy and one was marine, and one was a Top Gun type and one was a Blue. For me, I don't care if you were USN or USMC, you are still in the same branch of service. I do recall a USN type can take their commission to the USMC. I am sure there is allot of other squid-cross over stuff that these two sister services share, but I really don't care about that stuff.

I do know for a fact that there was a relationship and I think it was inappropriate. I just got finished taking all of my official UAL government anti bribery and anti corruption videos. I am sure yesterday's standard of behavior wouldn't fly today.