ALPA/USAPA topic of the week

[BoeingBoy]

That was long before the shuttle merger and it probably would have went down differently had ALPA gotten the well deserved boot back then.

Another non-answer answer. If all the current "DOH is the only fair way" devotees had been as "principled and honorable" about DOH then, even with reasonable fences for the widebodies, the Shuttle integration negotiations would have been settled quickly - no arbitrator and ALPA would have been just as happy. It was the "DOH - no way" crowd that drove the Shuttle result.

I know it doesn't justify the "I'm a victim" mentality, but every concession given by the East pilots was the result of a vote - every one. Either the pilot's voted to ratify it or voted to elect the MEC members who ratified it. And a large majority of times, even when the MEC members ratified something unpopular without a membership vote , they stayed it their elected positions because the pilots wouldn't vote to recall them. There's been recall votes in at least CLT, DCA, PHL, and PIT over the last 6-8 years. How many MEC members have been recalled for "taking it from us in the middle of the night"?

Jim

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Another non-answer answer. If all the current "DOH is the only fair way" devotees had been as "principled and honorable" about DOH then, even with reasonable fences for the widebodies, the Shuttle integration negotiations would have been settled quickly - no arbitrator and ALPA would have been just as happy. It was the "DOH - no way" crowd that drove the Shuttle result.

I know it doesn't justify the "I'm a victim" mentality, but every concession given by the East pilots was the result of a vote - every one. Either the pilot's voted to ratify it or voted to elect the MEC members who ratified it. And a large majority of times, even when the MEC members ratified something unpopular without a membership vote , they stayed it their elected positions because the pilots wouldn't vote to recall them. There's been recall votes in at least CLT, DCA, PHL, and PIT over the last 6-8 years. How many MEC members have been recalled for "taking it from us in the middle of the night"?

Jim

The issue as I saw it was not nearly as simple as you paint it. The issue was which date of hire should the shuttle guys get, their Eastern or Trump DOH, since they were made to resign from Eastern to work at Trump. Now, where does that put the folks hired at US that had previously been at Eastern, many of whom had gone on strike against Lorenzo and subsequently lost their jobs? Some paid for their support of ALPA with their livleihoods, only to be placed behind their brethren that did not. I, fortunately was not one of them, but I see the complications which were raised in that merger.

ALPA will not survive at ANY carrier unless they develop a comprehensive way to deal with the turbulent industry. They need a COMPLETE merger policy, which spells out EXACTLY where everyone would wind up in the event of a merger. The ONLY thing I see that even comes close to making this happen would be a national seniority list, but it'll never happen. That's why ALPA is DONE!!

 

[EastUS]

Another non-answer answer. If all the current "DOH is the only fair way" devotees had been as "principled and honorable" about DOH then, even with reasonable fences for the widebodies, the Shuttle integration negotiations would have been settled quickly - no arbitrator and ALPA would have been just as happy. It was the "DOH - no way" crowd that drove the Shuttle result.

I know it doesn't justify the "I'm a victim" mentality, but every concession given by the East pilots was the result of a vote - every one. Either the pilot's voted to ratify it or voted to elect the MEC members who ratified it. And a large majority of times, even when the MEC members ratified something unpopular without a membership vote , they stayed it their elected positions because the pilots wouldn't vote to recall them. There's been recall votes in at least CLT, DCA, PHL, and PIT over the last 6-8 years. How many MEC members have been recalled for "taking it from us in the middle of the night"?

Jim

You've collectively painted an excellent postings landscape containing but a very few of Alpa's many blunders...and always, seek to place blame directly upon each and every line pilot, rather than the innefective "association" that actually produced said blunders. By employing your same logic: I hold you personally responsible for the debacle in Iraq, since you haven't personally "recalled" the enitre US government as of yet. It "logically" follows then, that you fully support everything dreamed up in DC..and I don't mean merely Herndon. Utterly ridiculous?...Of course ...any such thinking is.

You imply the "I'm a victim" consideration has no basis in actual fact. Let me guess: The line pilots have always "dressed provocatively", and "been asking for it"? That conveniently overlooks the massive damage to pilots' career and lifestyles caused by Alpa over the years, through the cavalier actions of isolated little cliques of "reps", sometimes acting fully against their own charters, and without the slightest membership inputs via votes. Spare me the slightest nonsensical implication that I "voted" to throw away our futures via Alpa "geniuses" signing-off on the pension throw away for but one example.

"even when the MEC members ratified something unpopular without a membership vote" If you've paid ANY attention of late; you'll necessarilly have observed that it's tough to eliminate people in their positions..especially if they simply ignore recall requests. Herndon's just proved what unconscionable lengths they'll go to to keep their "faithfull" in power within PHL, by instantly purging whomever they choose, and "appointing" non-elected replacements at their pleasure. Let me reiterate that last slowly: The "Appointed Reps" in PHL were NOT "voted on" by ANYONE out here...Is at least THAT much clear to you? The entire population of PHL pilots now have ZERO "representation" in any MEC issues/etc..due to a whim up at Herndon.

Do you, in ANY way, seek to pretend that the "Imperial" nature of Alpa hasn't been the way it is now, fully proven to be, for a goodly long while? Kindly spare me, and all of us, the sad employment of any such fantasies.

An earlier poster put it very well: "I will stand up and take responsibility for what I vote for or against. When I get a chance to vote!"

I'll go with the devils advocate position for a moment here: Alpa's great/It must be, and even if not: It's ALL the fault of the line pilots for not revolting long ago...sigh..OK. Umm..any "principled and honorable" problem if we finally do just that NOW?

 

[BoeingBoy]

The issue as I saw it was not nearly as simple as you paint it.

It only gets complex if you don't believe in fragmentation clauses, like the one in the East contract - is this yet another one of ALPA's "screw the East pilots" provisions added in the dark of night without a vote? How horrible - thinking a pilot should be able to take his longevity along when jobs are sold to another airline. Can I take it that you'd be ok with going with the airplanes sold (fragmented) to another company but being treated like a new hire when you got there? You believe in longevity as sacred but would willingly give it up if you went with the jobs that were sold under the East contract's fragmentation language?

Oh, that's right - that's exactly what the East pilots approved for the MDA pilots when the membership voted to allow outsourcing the E170's - your jobs are going bye-bye, but only half of you can go along. BTW - forget about taking your longevity/seniority with you if you're one of the 50%.

I now understand why you'd be in favor of the Shuttle pilots not getting their Eastern DOH. Your furloughed brothers/sisters didn't deserve it so neither do the Shuttle folks.....

Jim

 

[EastUS]

How horrible - thinking a pilot should be able to take his longevity along when jobs are sold to another airline.

Ummm...so longevity has palpable value then? A pilot should be able to take "take his longevity along when jobs are sold to another airline"?...but...not when "merged"? So; If, as the west folk hold, AWA "bought" US...Umm..err..wouldn't that logically apply to all our jobs out here?

Heck..I'm really confused now. Your previous posts universally deny the value of longevity when used for a "merger". This one, when being done on behalf of trumpeting supposed Alpa good work, flips completely around on the idea? Oooo-Kaay then.

 

[BoeingBoy]

and always, seek to place blame directly upon each and every line pilot

Normal - spin to twist the meaning to suit your purposes. Show where I ever said "each and every line pilot" - be an "honorable" person.

Now, since you can't do that here's what I said. The pilots voted either for concessionary agreements or for the MEC members that approved those concessionary agreements. Just like the perfection of USAPA, the majority vote decides most issues. If you, or Joe Blow, didn't vote for the concessions or MEC members it doesn't matter as long as the majority of voters did. That's the way "voting - what a novel concept" works. Sometimes the individual pilot is on the winning side and sometimes on the losing side. But no matter which side the individual is on, the pilots voted and the majority of votes cast carried the day. If you don't like that process under ALPA, you won't like it much under USAPA either.

I'll make it simple for you too. The pilot group, through their collective votes, approved the company proposal that became LOA 93, the pay rates for the E190, the outsourcing of the E170 (with loss of 50% of the jobs held by furloughees/CEL pilots), the outsoucing of CRJ-700 flying, the cessation of the assessment to pay for medical coverage for furloughed pilots without such coverage. And that was just in the last 2-3 years leading up to the merger. Every LEC rep (guess who the MEC members are) was elected by the collective votes of the pilots he/she sought to represent (until the recent PHL trusteeship). Every active pilot got to vote on his/her LEC rep at least once every two years. Gee - maybe this voting thing isn't so novel after all.

Jim

 

[oldiebutgoody]

I now understand why you'd be in favor of the Shuttle pilots not getting their Eastern DOH. Your furloughed brothers/sisters didn't deserve it so neither do the Shuttle folks.....

Jim

I didn't say that AT ALL! I think that EVERYONE employed at LCC that came from one of it's predessessor airline should have gotten DOH. Of course the PI guys fought vehimently against this, especially after the screwing they gave Empire pilots. It should have been DOH from day one. Actually, there should be a national seniority list, and ALL major airline pilots would know EXACTLY where they stand in ANY merger OR fragmentation. The companies would not accept this, as it's way cheaper to them to hire "new" guys off the street for year 1 salary and reduced benefits. Another of ALPA's failures!

 

[EastUS]

Normal - spin to twist the meaning to suit your purposes. Show where I ever said "each and every line pilot" - be an "honorable" person.

The pilots voted either for concessionary agreements or for the MEC members that approved those concessionary agreements. Just like the perfection of USAPA, the majority vote decides most issues.

You're correct in that you've not said "each and every" but merely assigned full responsibility for any/all of Alpa's doings to the line pilots as a group. I'll have to note that nothing in any of your postings that I've seen accepts any notable responsibilty, at any level, for Alpa rep's/overall association's obvious blunders, nor even acknowledges that any such have ever occurred. I might have missed soemthing there. Perhaps you've some, even slight, admissions of Alpa's magnificence gone wrong, without such being directly the pilot groups' fault?

The damning issues lie within your immediate follow up: "..or for the MEC members that approved those concessionary agreements". If you wish to assign universal responsibilty for the MEC members..kindly explain to all how they're actually "elected", who does the "voting" and further note just how we'd go about removing them. So far; what's clearly apparent from recent events, is that Herndon will cheerfully render the pilots' collective will moot at it's convenience....in much the same way as the illuminati directly responsible for the "pension-ectomy" thought it best not to allow the stupid line pilots any vote.

"I'll make it simple for you too. The pilot group, through their collective votes, approved the company proposal that became LOA 93," Guess I'll have to take your/Alpo's "word" on that, since no one outside of Alpa saw the ballots, nor did the counting...and..there's supposedly no "accessable" records. Personally?...I wouldn't trust Herndon to walk my dog......

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Every active pilot got to vote on his/her LEC rep at least once every two years. Gee - maybe this voting thing isn't so novel after all.

Jim

The entire MEC and most reps were replaced by an election shortly thereafter. Can't go back and "redo" LOA 93 because the reps sucked. Too late, now we have to live with it. Just like when the MEC gave up the pension without even a vote. Other airlines were much more successful in saving at least a portion of their pensions.

For what the pilots pay for ALPA, you'd expect them to give far better advice and much better planning than they do. I watched a senior PIT rep throw everyone under the bus to save his pension for years, always admonishing that "we need to take care of the senior guys". Now, however, that mantra seems to have changed to "we need to give up senior guys' pay, benefits and perks to save the merger, and give it ALL to them". Sorry, not buying this time. Let's get on with the vote!

 

[EastUS]

Just like when the MEC gave up the pension without even a vote. Other airlines were much more successful in saving at least a portion of their pensions.

Most notably American..which shockingly, struggles by to this day with a far better contract and benefits, amazingly without Alpa's enlightened interference...I mean "leadership".

"For what the pilots pay for ALPA, you'd expect them to give far better advice and much better planning than they do. Let's get on with the vote!" Amen!

 

[ableoneable]

It appears we are back to the national seniority list argument.

It can never and will never happen.

The only way it would work is if North America was a closed shop. If Airline X decided to launch service and they had to go to the pilot supply house (ALPA or whatever you prefer) for their pilots a national list would work. Because ALPA is not a pilot cartel a national seniority list will always be a fantasy.

If ALPA were to ever adopt a national list they would never sign a new pilot group into ALPA. "Yea we would like you guys (JetBlue/Virgin/Spirit whomever) to join ALPA. Of course we have this national list and in the event of a downturn these senior airline pilots from UAL/LCC/DAL/NWA etc. will be able to bump you out of your seats. So just sign here."

The reason DOH was once an acceptable merger policy is that the industry was regulated and all of the carriers' pilot population had about the same demographic. Both the carriers and their pilots had almost identical longevity. If you merged two legacy carriers in 1967 you could use either a ratio or DOH and you would get similar results.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I'll have to note that nothing in any of your psotings that I've seen accepts any notable responsibilty, at any level, for Alpa rep's/overall association's obvious blunders, nor even acknowledged that any such have ever occurred.

Convenient, but wrong. I've previously said that ALPA's far from perfect and that they've turned into largely a black hole that sucks up money. So where do you want to start - accepting scabs back, proliferation of the B-Scale (which the wonderful APA started), letting jets be flown out of mainline. The list is long. However, ALPA not letting you have an opportunity to vote isn't one of their shortcomings - the pilt group had plenty of chances to vote over the last 15-16 years and didn't fail to ratify one concession they voted on. Is it any wonder that the East pilots on the MEC felt no differently. After all, "Live to fight another day" seemed to be the motto of the majority of East pilots.

I'll let you in on another little secret - the one and only reason I stayed current with my dues until just before retirement is so I could vote on the re-election of the CLT LEC reps at that time. The Capt Rep didn't run for re-election and the "illustrious" F/O rep got re-elected anyway, so it turned out to be a waste of money. But I voted.

If you wish to assign universal responsibilty for the MEC members..kindly explain to all how they're actually "elected", who does the "voting" and further note just how we'd go about removing them.

There you go with that "universal" thing again.....

But at the risk of just giving you more words to twist, and as you well know (or maybe not), the MEC members are elected by the pilots that they seek to represent (or re-elected by the pilots they do represent). The pilots in each base (local council) elect their LEC reps, who collectively become the MEC members. Now I guess I'll hear about how you didn't get to vote on the LEC reps in X base, and are thus relieved of all responsibility for the actions of the MEC - including those of your reps.

How you'd go about removing them? Two options - at the normal election don't re-elect your reps, or recall them. Both methods are available but made difficult by the small number of votes generally cast in LEC elections/recall efforts - just ask the MDA pilots based in DCA who tried to recall their reps but were outvoted by the "real mainline" pilots. BTW, this is another area where if you don't like the ALPA way you probably won't like the USAPA way - if you're in PHL you still won't get to vote on the PHX reps. But look on the bright side - you can continue to claim "I didn't get to vote".

Guess I'll have to take your/Alpo's "word" on that, since no one outside of Alpa saw the ballots, nor did the counting...and..there's evidently no accessable records. Personally?...I wouldn't trust these people to walk my dog......

And there's a gunman on a grassy knoll waiting to be found too. If you've got proof, present it. Otherwise, any conspiracy theory is as good as another.

Didn't see this one till just now:

Ummm...so longevity has palpable value then? A pilot should be able to take "take his longevity along when jobs are sold to another airline"?...but...not when "merged"?

Sure you take your longevity with you - Nic didn't take away your step on the pay scale (longevity determined) or annual vacation accrual (also longevity based).

Of course, what you conveniently ignore is that I was replying to oldie's post about the Eastern pilots resigning to go to Trump, thus not having any Eastern longevity - I even quoted the portion of his post that I was replying to. Under fragmentation, they took their longevity with them. If, like oldie, you believe that longevity equals seniority and seniority integrations should go by DOH there's only one conclusion you can come to - the Shuttle pilots should have been integrated by their Eastern DOH. Quite contrary to oldie's statement that it was more complex. Which quickly turned into "of course they should have gotten their DOH" once the fallacy of his "it's complex" argument wwas pointed out.

However, it should be obvious to even you that I don't share your or oldie's "longevity = seniority across airlines" theory. So while I believe everyone should keep their longevity during a merger (and will under Nic), that obviously shouldn't lead one to jump to the illogical conclusion (or at least try to claim) that I was saying that the seniority integration should therefore only be done by longevity. Your "confusion" is entirely self-induced, but I'm sure you can find a way to blame that on ALPA too. The "I didn't get ot vote on the cause of my confusion" ploy might work.....

Jim

 

[Piedmont1984]

Normal - spin to twist the meaning to suit your purposes. Show where I ever said "each and every line pilot" - be an "honorable" person.

Now, since you can't do that here's what I said. The pilots voted either for concessionary agreements or for the MEC members that approved those concessionary agreements. Just like the perfection of USAPA, the majority vote decides most issues. If you, or Joe Blow, didn't vote for the concessions or MEC members it doesn't matter as long as the majority of voters did. That's the way "voting - what a novel concept" works. Sometimes the individual pilot is on the winning side and sometimes on the losing side. But no matter which side the individual is on, the pilots voted and the majority of votes cast carried the day. If you don't like that process under ALPA, you won't like it much under USAPA either.



Jim

When the pilots voted, their vote was significantly influenced by the "expert" opinion of ALPA National's cadre of lawyers, accountants, advisors, etc. In retrospect, these people did not have our best interest as their primary motivation. At a time when DAL and others were hoping we would go away and thereby take some of the industry overcapacity with us, it would be naive to think ALPA wasn't responding in some way to their other, larger revenue sources.

If they really are after you then it's not paranoia.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Normal - spin to twist the meaning to suit your purposes. Show where I ever said "each and every line pilot" - be an "honorable" person.

He's doing what you're doing.

Now, since you can't do that here's what I said. The pilots voted either for concessionary agreements or for the MEC members that approved those concessionary agreements.

There's your tie in. And a lot of the reasons we are here today.

Just like the perfection of USAPA, the majority vote decides most issues. If you, or Joe Blow, didn't vote for the concessions or MEC members it doesn't matter as long as the majority of voters did. That's the way "voting - what a novel concept" works. Sometimes the individual pilot is on the winning side and sometimes on the losing side. But no matter which side the individual is on, the pilots voted and the majority of votes cast carried the day. If you don't like that process under ALPA, you won't like it much under USAPA either.

Since you quoted one of my sayings, I guess that was an invitation. Sorry Jim you are off base here. There are votes I participated in directly and as you have said earlier, indirectly. To me that is the problem. If I voted for Carley W. in GSO then by inference I also voted for Armin J. and since the MEC approved contract 92 I also voted for that. Since I only cast one ballot, then you could say I voted, which I didn't! So therefore does that equal the majority? Sorry that chain is fatally flawed.

I'll make it simple for you too. The pilot group, through their collective votes, approved the company proposal that became LOA 93, the pay rates for the E190, the outsourcing of the E170 (with loss of 50% of the jobs held by furloughees/CEL pilots), the outsoucing of CRJ-700 flying, the cessation of the assessment to pay for medical coverage for furloughed pilots without such coverage. And that was just in the last 2-3 years leading up to the merger. Every LEC rep (guess who the MEC members are) was elected by the collective votes of the pilots he/she sought to represent (until the recent PHL trusteeship). Every active pilot got to vote on his/her LEC rep at least once every two years. Gee - maybe this voting thing isn't so novel after all.

Jim

As I remember how the pay rates went down, it was a section that was cleverly designed "To be negotiated later" or something like that. So when the pay rates were published, I did not get a second vote on that. As for the outsourcing problem, let me see, we were sold the liquidation scenario, MDA was really a separate division, Republic didn't want any pilots, you're lucky it was the best we could do to get them to take 50% and all that other FUD. Because that's what you're saying we voted for. Sorry, that is not how it went down. Since LOA93, exactly how many votes have I had? One! That was the assessment. Why was it voted down? We were told it was no longer required. My last assessment was billed in Apr. and refunded in May. So in between LOA93 and the assessment vote, how much was indirectly voted on for me? The major ones are the retirement, the TA, and the profit sharing give away. Where was my direct vote? It wasn't. But according to your premise I did vote for them.

So once again, trying to tie in casting a single ballot for an LEC rep is the same as casting a ballot for every single vote by them, as if I cast the same vote is total BS. You present an interesting point of view, but in reality I haven't had the opportunity to cast that many votes in my career yet I am held accountable for the outcomes. Well no more. Maybe I should change my saying to:

Direct Voting, what a novel concept

 

[BoeingBoy]

Can't go back and "redo" LOA 93 because the reps sucked.

Very true. But just saying "that's over - I can't do anything about it now" and going back to flying your trips and paying no attention until the MEC either gives away something else or starts "the sky's falling, we gotta do something, agree to this" rhetoric all over again isn't the solution either. What's that saying - doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity or something like that. The East pilot group (ok EastUS - the voting majority of the East pilot group) did the same things over and over by buying into that same lame rhetoric from many of the same people repeatedly. I know that I was constantly amazed by the trained dog trick - the company says jump, the MEC says "how high", and enough of the pilot group shouted "don't waste time asking questions, we're jumping already" to pass whatever the company wanted (or the MEC was so anxious to jump - just like too many pilots - that they jumped enough for everybody).

Jim