U
Tech,
Don't think "helping United" is the term ALPA was using to spin this deal. The MEC Chairman endorsed the agreement and his lackeys were touting this as a break through agreement. The only problem was it was not.
Currently they are short staffed on the wide bodies and wanted to raise the monthly cap to 96 hours from 89 for the 757/767 777 and 747 pilots (320 and 737 pilots already fly 95) until November. What the crew desk does now is call pilots on days off, ask them to fly a trip earlier than their own trip and pay them time and 1/2 for the trip. This is a simplified answer and is called Senior Manning. ALPA has been against it as they say the company needs to bring on more bids for pilots to the bigger airplanes. ALPA was basically agreeing to SRM in this agreement and eliminating the pay increase that those that SRM currently get. This is but one of the many issues in this agreement that was really not favored by the group as two thirds voted no. The MEC has lost touch with the pilot group and is imploding quickly.
No summer of love coming. Just guys not wanting to give up anymore than we have already given.
Also sounds like our MEC Chairman was trying to do an end run and get himself some special dispensation to stay on as a BOD member. This is starting to open up like Karl Rove and his blackberry email accounts. When the final story is told ALPA may be replaced with a union that has been making some serious inroads on the campus.
Lot's of politics and the line pilots are caught in between this mess.
OP
UAL_TECH
Guest
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3
whaledriver
Advanced
- Jan 20, 2003
- 140
- 0
How is the push for a NEW pilot union going over at UAL??? If ALPA is replaced, we'll see the same type deal at NWA and DAL. Many pilots believe that its time for ALPA to be replaced...
Check out United Pilots Assoc.
[URL="http://pearlgroup.org/ballot.html"]http://pearlgroup.org/ballot.html[/URL]
Check out United Pilots Assoc.
[URL="http://pearlgroup.org/ballot.html"]http://pearlgroup.org/ballot.html[/URL]
767jetz
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,286
- 2,779
JMHO here:
The union IS the membership. No matter what name is on the pin... ALPA... APA... UPA... whatever.
With a new union, comes new elections, and new reps. But it's all the same people. Those who complain about ALPA are the same ones who rarely attend meetings and only get involved after some outcome occurs that they don't agree with.
Who do you think will run the new union?
And let me tell you, many of the ones I have talked to who support a new union have their own personal agenda. That's what motivates them. Either they are pissed off with ALPA's official stand on the age 60 rule, or they are ultra-conservative Republican Bush supporters pissed off with ALPA's support (and unions in general) of the Democratic party, or they think UAL will buy another airline and have delusions that we could staple the other group if only we were't ALPA. Believe me I've heard it all.
In the mean time, while we are chasing our tail getting a new union organized and up to speed, the company will continue bending our contract rules, stepping over what few rules we have left, and laughing at the chaos while we fight amongst ourselves.
ALPA is far from perfect. But we are kidding ourselves if we are to believe that any other union will be better. We would be replacing one set of guys with an agenda, with another set of guys with an agenda. What we do have with ALPA is a strong lobby in government, and strength in numbers.
Unity is key right now. No two ways about it.
767jetz
The union IS the membership. No matter what name is on the pin... ALPA... APA... UPA... whatever.
With a new union, comes new elections, and new reps. But it's all the same people. Those who complain about ALPA are the same ones who rarely attend meetings and only get involved after some outcome occurs that they don't agree with.
Who do you think will run the new union?
And let me tell you, many of the ones I have talked to who support a new union have their own personal agenda. That's what motivates them. Either they are pissed off with ALPA's official stand on the age 60 rule, or they are ultra-conservative Republican Bush supporters pissed off with ALPA's support (and unions in general) of the Democratic party, or they think UAL will buy another airline and have delusions that we could staple the other group if only we were't ALPA. Believe me I've heard it all.
In the mean time, while we are chasing our tail getting a new union organized and up to speed, the company will continue bending our contract rules, stepping over what few rules we have left, and laughing at the chaos while we fight amongst ourselves.
ALPA is far from perfect. But we are kidding ourselves if we are to believe that any other union will be better. We would be replacing one set of guys with an agenda, with another set of guys with an agenda. What we do have with ALPA is a strong lobby in government, and strength in numbers.
Unity is key right now. No two ways about it.
767jetz
Mags,
Well lets just say I disagree with some of your assessments and information.
the 96 hours was for the 777 and 747 only, the 767 was going to go to 92. The intent of raising the widebody caps was not because they are short pilots overall (which they are) but because they are in the wrong domiciles. If IAD-PEK was not awarded then there wouldnt have been the need. But that award, and the short term start up of it meant the manpower on the 747 was in the wrong place.
The temporary caps were to alleviate deadheading/ tdy/ and fatiguing W patterns according to the SSC. The 767 caps were to continue to allow those pilots on the 767 to go to training as 777/747/320 capts/300 capts. So a temp relief/flexibility for a long term gain. (pay protection for the whole month)
As far as the overall agreement, yes it had warts and the positive aspects of it couldnt overcome the negative, partially emotional wants of the pilots to say no after 5 years of having no other choice.
As far as the MEC chairman and his intentions....that is "pure baloney" as the Comm chair likes to say. And there is no requirement for the MEC chair to also be the BOD rep. Its just the practice ever since we got the seat. Look at the MEC policy manual, section 13.
As far UPA or Pearl? serious inroads? ha! they couldnt even get 2 out of 3 of their resolutions passed in DC. Out of a council of 1200 pilots they had 89 total votes (including proxies) Thats a lot of support? Keep drinking whatever kool aid they are serving cause it has to be some good stuff. :down:
Is UAL going to mess up this summer? Hell yeah because management is doing a lousy job of running this airline. We are short staffed overall, with little or no coverage for schedule interruptions due to storms in ORD or systemwide, and the capability to recover from such problems is poor.
Not the pilots fault and this version of "summer of love" will happen strictly due to managment.
And the MEC is not imploding....see the resolutions coming out of the recent MEC meeting. So the LOA didnt pass. Thats fine, life, and ALPA (you and me) moves on to improve the crap of BK contract we are working under.
DC
You going to be joining the picket lines?
jetz,
You are right. The Union is only as good as the membership. The loud mouths blame the union when things don't go their way. You need to participate to make it work. Maybe you guys need Dubinsky back. I would like to see him squeeze a golden egg out of Tiltons ass.
Similar threads
- UAL_TECH
- United Airlines
