Censored from the ALPA web boards

[jke406]

It's great to see that ALPA is encouraging a free flow of ideas on its message board.

Nothing like a little censorship to let the members know their views are important.

I'm sure Rez O. Lenin will be able to justify the censorship of contributing members, though.

 

[Lear70]

Formerly on the ALPA web board, but deleted by ALPA:


Did you know that Date of Hire seniority integration is now mandated by the law President Bush signed in December of 2007 when two airlines with different unions merge??? Don’t you think that is critical information considering that Parker has stated another merger is likely and he recently secured a golden parachute clause for key management? Here are details; pass this along to everyone who might be interested:
------------------------------

Ummm... Have you actually *READ* Allegheny-Mohawk?

In its ENTIRETY?

You really need to, especially since it's now law.

Allegheny-Mohawk does NOT automatically equal Date of Hire. Period. The end.

The whole POINT of Allegheny-Mohawk is that no carrier can automatically staple an entire pilot group under another based on ANY single or combined basis (including DOH), if it would result in economic hardship to the pilots at one or the other carrier.

Specifically, it requires the carriers to integrate in a "fair and equitable manner" and, if the pilots involved take a significant pay cut for an extended amount of time (get bumped out of equipment or seat), the carrier has to actually make them whole in terms of income by a formula contained in the ruling.

Allegheny-Mohawk is complicated, and does NOT automatically equal DOH. In fact, one could argue that, because the financial fallout from a windfall to one group is placed BACK on the carrier, the carrier will likely figure out a slotted or fenced integration arrangement to save them MILLIONS in extra payroll costs from Allegheny-Mohawk protections.

You *might* get DOH, just saying it's not a foregone conclusion and, if you get displaced, you get pay protected.

No guarantees on lost upgrade expectations of course, but seceding from ALPA won't help you either. I'm not a big ALPA cheerleader, but since ALL airlines are going to get Allegheny-Mohawk protections, regardless of union involvement, it makes a poor reason to secede from ALPA.

There's other good arguments out there both FOR and AGAINST ALPA; pick a better bandwagon.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

AGAINST ALPA; pick a better bandwagon.

TRUST. ALPA cannot be trusted. ALPA operates in secret concerning all its policies. ALPA has no transparency. And when major issues are decided the memberships needs are not met.

The lack of trust, truth, and honesty is the bandwagon.

And this threads discussion of the new legislation is another prime example of TWA ALPA lying to it members and doing the wrong thing thereby creating new legislation to protect the worker from ALPA and other unethical unions.

 

[PCL_128]

You *might* get DOH, just saying it's not a foregone conclusion and, if you get displaced, you get pay protected.

The chance of actually getting DOH under the LPPs is virtually non-existent. ALPA probably removed the post that started this article because it is filled with lies and misinformation in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way out of ignorance. As usual, USAPA and their supporters should be ashamed.

 

[tomgoodman]

Respond, don't censor

ALPA probably removed the post that started this article because it is filled with lies and misinformation in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way out of ignorance.

That may have been ALPA's motive, but they would have better served their membership by posting a well-reasoned refutation instead of deleting the post. That way, others who might share a good-faith misconception would be educated instead of provoked. Silencing debate does not promote unity.

 

[PCL_128]

That may have been ALPA's motive, but they would have better served their membership by posting a well-reasoned refutation instead of deleting the post. That way, others who might share a good-faith misconception would be educated instead of provoked. Silencing debate does not promote unity.

I agree. Unfortunately, many MECs have a strict policy about not allowing the union leadership to post on their message boards, so that might have been an issue with posting a rebuttal. I've always been against said policies, but I seem to be in the minority.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

TRUST. ALPA cannot be trusted. ALPA operates in secret concerning all its policies. ALPA has no transparency. And when major issues are decided the memberships needs are not met.

What are you going to do about it?

The lack of trust, truth, and honesty is the bandwagon.

Funny... ALPA members keep not voting in these untrustworthy leaders. How many times does one have to do the same thing over and over while still yielding an undesirable result before they make a change?

What do you call someone who keeps banging thier head against the wall?

And this threads discussion of the new legislation is another prime example of TWA ALPA lying to it members and doing the wrong thing thereby creating new legislation to protect the worker from ALPA and other unethical unions.

Silly democracy....

 

[Lear70]

That may have been ALPA's motive, but they would have better served their membership by posting a well-reasoned refutation instead of deleting the post. That way, others who might share a good-faith misconception would be educated instead of provoked. Silencing debate does not promote unity.

That's absolutely correct, and has always been a problem ALPA (and other unions I've been associated with) have had.

Silence only FUELS the "black helicopter" conspiracy theorists... it doesn't help solve the problem and, consistently, the loudest voices always get the attention of those who don't go to the source to find out things for themselves.

Then, the next thing you know, every line pilot has heard the rumors, chalked it down as "fact", and you have a much harder time getting the truth out there.

Dealing with the problem head-on, calmly, dispassionately, and factually, will solve most problems. Too bad most union leaders don't seem to understand this basic premise.

 

[jke406]

ALPA probably removed the post that started this article because it is filled with lies and misinformation in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way out of ignorance.

How can you possibly defend this action? This further erodes your already piss-poor credibility.

You sound like Big Brother from Orwell's "1984." Have you read it? Could have been based on the ALPA apologists on this forum, especially you, UALdriver, and Rez O. Lenin.

Pathetic. I want my money back.

 

[PCL_128]

How can you possibly defend this action? This further erodes your already piss-poor credibility.

Did you read further down, or were you too busy frothing at the mouth with hatred for the Association? I already posted that I agree with Tom's opinion (and Lear's, for that matter) that this sort of action ultimately backfires. But the original post that was removed was categorically untrue. The proper way to handle it would have been a formal response from the Association. As I said earlier, however, most MECs have a strict policy against ALPA leaders posting on ALPA message boards. Many MECs actually deactivate the write access of elected Officers so they don't even have the capability to respond. I've always disagreed with this policy, and I made sure it didn't happen at Pinnacle with our union boards.

 

[Freight Dog]

The former America West pilots like the plan put forward by the airline, but the US Airways crew are unwilling to ratify the new contract, which would make less experienced American West pilots more senior than their eastern counterparts.

Less experienced?

 

[PHXFLYR]

HEY !!! I represent that statement... uh,um, I mean resent that statement


PHXFLYR

 

[Freight Dog]

Yeah you would... ya inexperienced bum!

How did you and your passengers ever survive without the Easties?

 

[PHXFLYR]

It was tuff, 'lemme tell ya'. Every day I thought was going to be my last. If only the passengers knew. So "glad" the "easties" are here to rescue us from ourselves....NOT


PHXFLYR

 

[John Pennekamp]

Shoulda known we could count on Rez and PCL, ALPA's two biggest cheerleaders to defend this egregious act of censorship.

It is well documented that ALPA squelches any viewpoint it finds objectionable, or otherwise in competition to the goals of its leaders. Whether it's censorship on the message boards, or local reps engaging in a smear campaign on dissenters (as we see here at ASA), ALPA punishes anyone who publicly speaks against its agenda.

As said, this censorship only throws gas on the fire. The best ALPA could have done would be to leave the post up, and let others attack the poster for not knowing what he was talking about (yes,as said, A-M does not guarantee DOH, only equity). But censoring it only makes him a martyr and fans the flames.

More poor political strategy from the Big Brother bullies running ALPA.

 

[sonny320]

Well said-
I've asked this before- do you think any airline, given the stagnation at USAir will agree to a DOH merger w/ you? That would be a windfall for you in EVERY possible case.
Before you say it's law- look at how you've ignored the law during your current process. No airline will allow it- DOH was changed as policy for good reasons and if the USAir weren't bought out by America West (who has long been treated like a step-child by ALPA) but rather by United or Delta you wouldn't have gotten as far as you have with your coup.
Sorry=- but we dont live in a socialist society. There are consequences to being at poorer run, stagnant company. You've been there for a LONG time- you've had your chances to get out to places where movement is better.

The east's issue is with our seniority system overall. In that- i agree with you. But don't be an old timer and try to change the rules mid-game....

FYI: AWA did not buy UsAir.

 

[PCL_128]

Shoulda known we could count on Rez and PCL, ALPA's two biggest cheerleaders to defend this egregious act of censorship.

Damn it, JP, I didn't defend it, I specifically disagreed with it! I despise censorship.

 

[waveflyer]

FYI: AWA did not buy UsAir.

FYI: yes they did. the only people confused by that are AAA pilots - b/c dougie thought he'd be diplomatic and refer to it as a merger. AWA bought USAir- they refer to it as a merger to give respect to the east assets and contributions to the whole. The decision to view it as that doesn't change the fact that AWA BOUGHT USAIR.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Shoulda known we could count on Rez and PCL, ALPA's two biggest cheerleaders to defend this egregious act of censorship..

I did? Can you quote and/or reference?

 

[TWA Dude]

FYI: AWA did not buy UsAir.

In all the SEC documents AWA is listed as the acquiring carrier. This is a fact. Also a fact is that the money to finance the aquisition came from outside investors. The relevence of all this: ZERO! (Hint: Nicolau didn't care either.)

 

[jke406]

EVERY SINGLE THREAD on this forum eventually gets hijacked by the East/West crybabies.

Get your own b!tch board. leave us alone.

 

[waveflyer]

In all the SEC documents AWA is listed as the acquiring carrier. This is a fact. Also a fact is that the money to finance the aquisition came from outside investors. The relevence of all this: ZERO! (Hint: Nicolau didn't care either.)

well said- i'm not trying to flame. i dont really care about the integration- i care that usair lost an opportunity to increase their bottom of the barrell wages and work rules and chose not to. That's a pretty big transgression in today's environment in my book. you've really hurt the industry with this fight.

 

[Turtle21]

FYI: AWA did not buy UsAir.

" The Merger Agreement provides that, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, Barbell Acquisition Corp. will merge with and into America West Holdings (the Merger), with America West Holdings continuing as a wholly owned subsidiary of US Airways Group. "

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/050713/lcc8-k.html

 

[Prog 2/2]

Shoulda known we could count on Rez and PCL, ALPA's two biggest cheerleaders to defend this egregious act of censorship.

You do understand that USAPA is attempting to decertify ALPA as the bargaining agent for US Airways pilots, right?

And you do understand that the ALPA webboards, just like this one, have rules that apply to what can, and can't, be posted, right?

Pretty sure that any post that promotes the decertification of ALPA would violate the rules you agree to when you log on to that board.

 

[jke406]

Pretty sure that any post that promotes the decertification of ALPA would violate the rules you agree to when you log on to that board.

If ALPA is sure it's the answer to the problem (as it claims to be), then why not have an open discussion about the issues, rather than trying to control what its members are discussing?

Makes one wonder what ALPA is trying to hide.

 

[ALGFLYR]

Makes one wonder what ALPA is trying to hide.

They are trying to hide the TRUTH!!!

 

[JoeMerchant]

So IF this information is true.....should ALPA censor it?

They have the right to....but is it in the best interest of some of it's members?

What if this information is beneficial to some of it's members? Does ALPA sacrifice minority members of it's organization in order to protect the organization? Is that the right thing to do?

Rez? PCL?

 

[JoeMerchant]

I agree. Unfortunately, many MECs have a strict policy about not allowing the union leadership to post on their message boards, so that might have been an issue with posting a rebuttal. I've always been against said policies, but I seem to be in the minority.

I agree 100% with you on this PCL....I never agreed with that policy....

Politicians don't like having to put thoughts down in writing to the masses....makes them accountable for their positions....Much easier to play to both sides of the aisle when you don't put things down in writing.....

 

[ALGFLYR]

Captain: "You want answers?"

Chief Pilot: "I think we are entitled"

Captain: "You want answers?!"

Chief Pilot: "I want the truth!"

Captain: "You can't handle the truth!!!"

Captain (continuing): "We live in a world that requires revenue.
That revenue must be flown by people with elite skills. Who's going
to do it? You, Mr CEO? You Mr. Finance? You, Ms. Human Resources? We
have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You
scoff at the Line Pilots and you curse our mediocre incentives. You
have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what we know.
And my very existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you,
drives REVENUE! You don't want to know the truth because deep down
in places you don't talk about at staff meetings, you want me in
that airplane. You NEED me in that airplane!!

We use words like working radar, bad weather, on time departures,
airworthiness, upgrades, commuting, another round, medium-rare, on-
the-rocks, Cohiba. We use these words as the backbone of all
Professional Aviation. You use them as a punch line!

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to
people who rise and sleep under the very blanket of service I
provide and then question the manner in which I provide it. I would
rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I
suggest you pick up a flight bag. Either way, I don't give a damn
what you think you're entitled to!"

Chief Pilot: "Did you expense the lap dancers?"

Captain: "I did the job I was hired to do."

Chief Pilot: "Did you expense the lap dancers?!"

Captain: "You're goddanm right I did!

 

[JoeMerchant]

It is well documented that ALPA squelches any viewpoint it finds objectionable, or otherwise in competition to the goals of its leaders. Whether it's censorship on the message boards, or local reps engaging in a smear campaign on dissenters (as we see here at ASA), ALPA punishes anyone who publicly speaks against its agenda.

That happens here....say it ain't so....

I agree with you, but how can you type this and than not be surprised when people say no to ALPA....
Is this really the organization we want to speak for us when it does what you just described?