Alpa International Bod's

[USA320Pilot]

At last week's ALPA International Board of Director's meeting the delegates passed an ALPA Constitution change that would allow ALPA International to assume trusteeship of any MEC or LEC, or any officer or LEC Rep, if (in addition to failure to comply with the ALPA Constitution, or financial malpractice or corruption) their actions "exposes the Association to detrimental consequences by engaging in a substantial failure to perform significant legal or representational duties of a bargaining representative."

This constituion change will effect any MEC member who purposely misrepresents information or otherwise commits fraud. It will now permit ALPA Internaional to take over any LEC who in the opinion of the Association conducts activity that has "detrimental consequences" for its membership.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[UseYourHead]

Thank God for that, if we could only turn the clock back a month or two before these cowards did what they did...anyone of the prior offers were significantly better than the next (like the ALPA advisors said they would be).

At least next time a suicidal group gets in there is a mechanism to deal with them....

At last week's ALPA International Board of Director's meeting the delegates passed an ALPA Constitution change that would allow ALPA International to assume trusteeship of any MEC or LEC, or any officer or LEC Rep, if (in addition to failure to comply with the ALPA Constitution, or financial malpractice or corruption) their actions "exposes the Association to detrimental consequences by engaging in a substantial failure to perform significant legal or representational duties of a bargaining representative."

This constituion change will effect any MEC member who purposely misrepresents information or otherwise commits fraud. It will now permit ALPA Internaional to take over any LEC who in the opinion of the Association conducts activity that has "detrimental consequences" for its membership.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="194104"][/post]​

 

[Benz M-100]

Such as those who gave away the DB plan?

 

[BoeingBoy]

I particularly liked this part:

"assume trusteeship of any .... LEC Rep"

I think I'll run for office, fail to perform my duties, and let ALPA National be my trustee. Will they support me and the little lady in the style we've become accustomed to?

Jim

 

[Bear96]

This constituion change will effect any MEC member who purposely misrepresents information or otherwise commits fraud.

[post="194104"][/post]​

Uh oh-- you better not end up on the MEC then or you'll be in loads of trouble...

 

[USA320Pilot]

UseYourHead:

Your point is well taken. The "just say no" ALPA MEC that was lead by the RC4 was the first MEC in the history of ALPA to give the company more than their "ask".

The ALPA Board of Directors, made up of members from every carrier, witnessed what happened at US Airways and will never let that happen again.

The advisors said that every proposal would get worse and now the entire pilot group has to suffer because of the actions of the RC4 and their "all rookie" Negotiating Committee.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

Guess the majority who voted for it, gave more then the "ask" and must be "rookies" since they voted for it.

And the whole board knows you were the Cheerleader for the Yes voters.

 

[BoredToDeath]

Gentalman,

The kind thread starter is misleading you about the recent changes to the Constitution and By-Laws.

These changes would have done no one any good in removing the RC4 from office.

These changes were to protect the Association ONLY with regards to major lawsuits.

Only a recall of officers can be accomplished by those they represent.

In order to place a Trustee in the Officers place would require a vote of the ENTIRE Board of Directors.

And finally, the changes that were made had mostly to do with defining the instances and time line for a Trusteeship. So long as the RC4 were shown to be representing the majority of the pilots in their respective bases, this language would have done no one who wanted them out any good. In other words, the language already existed, changes were made to protect ALPA.

In fact the language has been in place for over 40 years and has been used once during the Air Wisconsin Merger (18 years ago). These recent changes came about because of the American Airlines and TWA fiasco.

On a final note, its understood that every Rep at the BOD was very familar with the RC4 and the majority would not support using this language in that scenario.

Those are the facts.

And to USA320PILOT,

Your PM'd threats are meaningless, as I have not done anything wrong. You however may want to become familar with the ALPA Constitution and By-Laws, Article VIII Section 1 A (1) through (10)

And since you continue to act like a five year old you can stop PMing me. I suggest you inform yourself better and post facts not opinion when appearing to report the news of the Association. Doing otherwise may appear to be engaging in an act contrary to the best interests of the Association or its members.

 

[UseYourHead]

700,

When will you get it. The next position would have been worse. How many times does it take for you to figure that out.

Now the AFA, IAM, CWA, and other will all gt worse deals too, by choie or by the judge.

DUH

In fact, the good new is, at thi point you can all negotiate a pay raise with an agreement.

Guess the majority who voted for it, gave more then the "ask" and must be "rookies" since they voted for it.

And the whole board knows you were the Cheerleader for the Yes voters.

[post="194164"][/post]​

 

[USA320Pilot]

BoredToDeath:

Your post is misleading. Furthermore, you were the one who started the PM's and threatened me. The constituion and by-laws change was created because of the RC4 and approved by the Associaton's BOD.

This constituion and by-law change can be used to remove the RC4, not to mention the pending litigation that has been briefed to the MEC by ALPA Legal. You should contact ALPA"s Legal Department on this point. By the way -- why are you afraid to identify yourself to me since you threaten me in PM's?

Therefore, it would serve a better purpose for you to tell the truth.

By the way, can you tell me who was the first roll call lead MEC in ALPA's history that obtained a TA that was worse than the company's concession "ask"?

Fraternally,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoredToDeath]

BoredToDeath:

Your post is misleading. Furthermore, you were the one who started the PM's and threatened me. The constituion and by-laws change was created because of the RC4 and approved by the Associaton's BOD.

This constituion and by-law change can be used to remove the RC4, not to mention the pending litigation that has been briefed to the MEC by ALPA Legal. You should contact ALPA"s Legal Department on this point. By the way -- why are you afraid to identify yourself to me since you threaten me in PM's?

Therefore, it would serve a better purpose for you to tell the truth.

By the way, can you tell me who was the first roll call lead MEC in ALPA's history that obtained a TA that was worse than the company's concession "ask"?

Fraternally,

USA320Pilot

[post="194302"][/post]​

USA320PILOT,

I already gave you the facts above, and as has been shown many times over, you are wrong. Call your local status rep, or for that matter, call any rep who was at the BOD. Then you can come back here and apologize for misleading the folks on this board for your own personal gain.

Can this new language remove a Rep? NO

Can this new language place a trustee in the Reps position? YES

Was this language adopted because of and for the RC4? NO

And read carefully at what I wrote to you, it was no threat. I will seek to remove any member of ALPA that tries to go after any rep using this new language if ALPA is not facing the same "scenarios" or "intent" that these language changes were meant to address.

 

[d328pilot]

The US Air situation was not discussed in reference to this constitutional change. The backgroud was protection of the association from situations that would be similar to what happend at American. The RC4 was not discussed at plenary or in committee that I was present for.

 

[DorkDriver]

The US Air situation was not discussed in reference to this constitutional change. The backgroud was protection of the association from situations that would be similar to what happend at American. The RC4 was not discussed at plenary or in committee that I was present for.

[post="194317"][/post]​

The RC 4 may not have been discussed at either plenary or committee, but it was pretty obvious what the true intent was for, even with the President of the Association only talking about the one incident at AA......

 

[USA320Pilot]

DorkDriver is correct and I personally know of what the conversations were between US Airways ALPA members and Paul Rice regarding the RC4 and this constituion and by-laws change. Furthermore, Chris Beebe was directly involved with some of this.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[Rico]

Friends do not let friends drive drunk.

And National Unions do not allow 4 people to financially ruin them without a means to manage risk.