Frank Lorenzo had an excuse, he was management

[Fast43]

Tossing out red herrings about what a union might or might not attempt to do is pointless.

Excuse me!! What Planet have you been on?? usapa has stated themselves more than once what their intentions are.

If anyone casts their vote without basing their decision on what the Constitution and Bylaws support and require, then they are just shooting in the dark.

Even if usapa's bylaws have no basis in reality?

quote]

Fast

 

[Prog 2/2]

Seniority solutions is not the present question before the pilots.

Really?

Somebody better tell the USAPA clowns, quick.

Seems to me that's what's driving the bus.

ALPA has left the building already.

We'll see. Maybe, maybe not. One thing for sure, any pretense that you or your cohorts had at integrity has certainly departed.

Some regard seniority as a union responsibility and there exists a dispute about whether or not ALPA is fit to provide representation.

You were all for their representation, their processes, and their integration methodology, right up until you didn't get your way.

Now the process is "flawed", the methodology "unfair", and the arbitrator "senile".

The present circumstances demonstrate that, if nothing else, ALPA has its limitations.

Lot's of 'em.

But the only thing the present circumstances really demonstrate is your greed, irrationality, and lack of ability to abide by your agreements.


That is why the NMB has ruled there is a dispute.

They counted cards.

They made no other judgment.


Tossing out red herrings about what a union might or might not attempt to do is pointless.

Not in this case.

The only reason USAPA exists is to gut Nicolau, fence the AWA pilots, and attempt a seat-grabbing end run around a federal arbitration decision.

Not one of those predictions are red, or even remotely fishy.



If anyone casts their vote without basing their decision on what the Constitution and Bylaws support and require, then they are just shooting in the dark.

And a large part of the USAPA C&BL are aimed at disenfranchising the west pilots so you can get your lowball, fence riddled contract ratified.



Many people get pulled in by silly emotional arguments and throw tantrums.

Like "Nicolau stapled 15 year US guys behind AWA pilots that weren't even born when they were hired"?

And, my favorite, "seniority matters, so let's decertify ALPA".


Some people get all teary eyed about ALPA nostalgia and choke up at the thought of admitting their heros aren't perfect.

It shouldn't be an emotional issue. If your lawn care service mows down your flower bed you ask him WTF. If he tells you that he will continue mowing down your flower bed because he knows better than you do then you tell him he is mistaken about who works for who in this relationship and you fire him if he is recalcitrant. If he starts throwing rocks through your windows and pouring dirty oil on the lawn then he is vindictive and it will affect his employment with other clients. The more vindictive and hateful they are as they are ushered off your property the more it will affect any future opportunities they may have otherwise had.

No comment on these last two.

If this were a rational, logical argument about the failures of ALPA representation, the crappy position that 2 bankruptcies put your career in, or just a harmless rant, I'd be more than happy to indulge you.

But what you and yours are trying to do isn't noble, it isn't about righting any wrongs, and it isn't even remotely about the failings of ALPA.

All it is, is an attempt to exercise your sense of entitlement on the backs of the west pilots.

 

[Turtle21]

Tossing out red herrings about what a union might or might not attempt to do is pointless.

Excuse me!! What Planet have you been on?? usapa has stated themselves more than once what their intentions are.

If anyone casts their vote without basing their decision on what the Constitution and Bylaws support and require, then they are just shooting in the dark.

Even if usapa's bylaws have no basis in reality?

quote]

Fast

The Constitution and Bylaws are on the ballot. Reality enough. Don't forget to vote.

 

[Bringupthebird]

It shouldn't be an emotional issue. If your lawn care service mows down your flower bed you ask him WTF. If he tells you that he will continue mowing down your flower bed because he knows better than you do then you tell him he is mistaken about who works for who in this relationship and you fire him if he is recalcitrant. .

Thanks for the perfect example of USAir's cavalier attitude. The east pilots on property today never "earned" anything in their contract (like scope, or pensions) so they all to easily give it away. So too, they throw away ALPA and all that it has provided over the years. They pretend to be defending seniority, but the cluster**** that is USAPA will end up screwing that up as well. They will be left with Nicolau intact and implemented, an underfunded and inexperienced union trying to find it's way out of the dry cleaning bag it's playing with and 5000 angry pilots wondering what happened to the promised paradise.

Savor the feeling of victory on April 17 (should the worst-case scenario come to pass) because it's gonna have to last you a while.

 

[waveflyer]

Lear70- I think the assumption that the AAA MEC wasn't doing what the majority of the pilot group wanted needs to be re-examined. I get the sense that their pilot group would have not been satisfied and looked for heads to roll if they got anything but DOH. They are politicians- and after all the rolling over they did for management, politically- could they afford to roll over on the long held AAA belief that mergers should be DOH?

What's ironic is that if it were not for the seniority issue- i'd think many AWA pilots could vote out ALPA.

To beat this to death- what needs to happen again?
50%+1 vote for representation and whoever gets the most votes out of those who voted, wins? So if non-political types abstain- that will benefit the USAPA side who is very motivated to vote? Or is 50%+1 for USAPA needed?

 

[Turtle21]

Thanks for the perfect example of USAir's cavalier attitude. The east pilots on property today never "earned" anything in their contract (like scope, or pensions) so they all to easily give it away. So too, they throw away ALPA and all that it has provided over the years. They pretend to be defending seniority, but the cluster**** that is USAPA will end up screwing that up as well. They will be left with Nicolau intact and implemented, an underfunded and inexperienced union trying to find it's way out of the dry cleaning bag it's playing with and 5000 angry pilots wondering what happened to the promised paradise.

Savor the feeling of victory on April 17 (should the worst-case scenario come to pass) because it's gonna have to last you a while.

I need ALPA like a submarine needs a screen door.

Vote on April 17?

The only thing the USAPA constitution guarantees is the pilot's right to vote. ALPA does not and Prater is more than happy to make that distinction crystal clear just weeks before the election.

I love the man.:beer:

 

[PCL_128]

50%+1 need to vote for any representation (either ALPA or uSAPa, or some other write-in). If that threshold is met, then whichever union has the most votes will be the bargaining agent. I think you're overestimating the motivation on the East side and underestimating the motivation on the West, though. I think you'll find that many East pilots won't really go through with it in the end. The West pilots have extreme motivation to keep the uSAPa rapists out of power, though. In the end, I think it will be extremely close.

 

[waveflyer]

How many new hires actually get to vote?
That's usually a pretty apolitical group in any pilot group.

I hope youre right PCL- But it would go a long way if ALPA national could take some definitive and objective steps toward cleaning up the beauracracy that has developed over time. And re-evaluate it's version of seniority. Is there anyone that only holds one stock? Why anyone- no matter where you are would object to a national list is beyond me- who could be so arrogant as to not want to diversify their risk and careers and type of flying?

I'm against USAPA b/c it goes in the opposite direction of what we need to do. Almost all of our concessions and problems have their root in our self-created seniority system. I agree w/ the above 100%- either get a national list- or go emirates and dump it all together. Right now it's being used against us in every way- and only divides us.

(PCL- i know you disagree- but realize that I don't care- give me another solution or stay quiet.

Thx for the info though.)

 

[PCL_128]

Why anyone- no matter where you are would object to a national list is beyond me- who could be so arrogant as to not want to diversify their risk and careers and type of flying?

It may be "beyond you," but facts are facts. Huge portions of the membership are against an SSL. That creates too big a road block. These SSL fantasies are counter-productive.

 

[waveflyer]

no they aren't
and
where's your solution?
are you denying the problem i laid out exists?
are there, or are there not, many unions who do things much much differently?

 

[PCL_128]

no they aren't

A thought provoking response.

where's your solution?
are you denying the problem i laid out exists?

Yes. Very much so.

are there, or are there not, many unions who do things much much differently?

Yes there are. Doesn't change the fact that it's too late for us to set up a different system.

 

[waveflyer]

You deny that companies industry wide are using our need to protect seniority at an individual company as leverage to gain UNREAL concessions???

Are you serious??

If we didn't have to keep weak companies in business to protect our seniority, there wouldn't have been 1/2 of the concessions since 9/11.

you're an indoctrinated apologist. Could you do me a favor and let someone else respond to a post from me?

regardless of your name-dropping and the elbows and other extremities you've rubbed against 'important' alpa men- i don't particularly view your opinion as all that important. I'm really not trying to convince you, i know where you stand and really don't need your comment on every single one of my posts. You add insight now and then- but you're overkill man- and totally averse to change- I - and a WHOLE LOT OF OTHER PILOTS -think that the old 1940's way ALPA's been doing business is not working- And i can't care less that you disagree- thousands of others who are as unhappy as ever, flying longer and longer hours for less and less pay -agree w/ me.

Too late?? -There was never a good time- it would be an adjustment and a challenge- you're argument seems to be that ALPA is not up to that sort of challenge- You might also say that having all Brand flying under one list is also "too-late" and not "realistic"- but you applaud APA's efforts? Maybe they have leaders thinking more than just short term.

You might have a point though: ALPA's so beaurocratic you need a resolution to sharpen pencils when they break- and that's a difficult process. I will agree with you that ALPA might not be an organization capable of tackling this issue.

Where is the big picture? Where's the national plan? Why do we have a national union? What is ALPA doing to increase leverage? If the leadership doesnt address these things- USAir won't be the last decertification effort alpa will face...

 

[PCL_128]

You deny that companies industry wide are using our need to protect seniority at an individual company as leverage to gain UNREAL concessions???

No, I deny that it's one of the biggest problems we face. Our biggest problem is the anti-labor government and the laws that are stacked against us. Fix that, and the seniority problem becomes moot.

Could you do me a favor and let someone else respond to a post from me?

Sure. I'm sure Rez can stop by and give you an education too, if you'd like.

And i can't care less that you disagree- thousands of others who are as unhappy as ever, flying longer and longer hours for less and less pay -agree w/ me.

That's all well and good, but I ask again: what are you doing about it?!? You still haven't answered the question I've posed to you numerous times: what office have you run for to get involved and fix the problems that you perceive?

You might also say that having all Brand flying under one list is also "too-late" and not "realistic"

Actually, that's something that is realistic in some cases.

You might have a point though: ALPA's so beaurocratic you need a resolution to sharpen pencils when they break- and that's a difficult process. I will agree with you that ALPA might not be an organization capable of tackling this issue.

The problem with an NSL isn't ALPA bureaucracy, it's that you'll never get the pilots to agree to a solution. Why don't you go start a thread about how an NSL should be put together? Then you can watch all of the idiots fight with each other, because no one is willing to to do what it takes to make it happen. AWA/AAA and DAL/NWA can't even agree on how to combine their seniority lists, but you think combining the seniority lists of the 43 pilot groups that ALPA represents is doable? What are you smoking?

 

[Lear70]

Just think... with a NSL, the West/East merger WOULD have gone DOH, and there's nothing anyone could have done about it (something I don't think should have happened and glad it didn't).

That's the whole point of National single seniority list: to protect your career if you have to go on strike and/or your company shuts down - you go to any other company that is hiring pilots and enter at your existing seniority and longevity (which is why the airlines would fight it to the bitter end and it would HAVE to be negotiated into the CBL).

There's more than one argument for/against a NSL. Personally, given the low level of involvement and high level of apathy of most pilots, I believe in it, simply because it would finally give pilots a backbone to really take it to the mat and STFD if required to obtain a good contract.

Otherwise, most people won't save for a strike fund, don't want to go out on strike, and will give in to just about anything when faced with that harsh reality. Too many people are scared to death to be on the street (hint: it's not that bad. Other jobs ARE out there. I'm living proof. Difficult? Yes. As good as the job I just left? No. More money? Yes, in the short run, nowhere NEAR as much in the long run, but not as much time home - about half).

Your mileage may vary... I predict it won't happen however. Too many people are too senior and too happy with their own lot in life to throw such an uncertain variable into their mix. It would have to be introduced NOW, with the independent unions who make up CAPA, get THEIR pilots on board, bring in FDX and AA, etc, and make it a somewhat-established "norm".

Again, when faced with an idea that would let a failed carrier's pilots come onto your list with their existing seniority (which could be a LOT of people higher than you IF your company was hiring) would be a big pill to swallow.

Then again, it could be YOU who ended up in that situation. Tough arguments for and against, but most people (anal-retentive pilots especially) don't like change. Getting it past the membership would be an impressive feat.

 

[Bringupthebird]

I need ALPA like a submarine needs a screen door.

Please remind us of that sentiment when you see your underfunded under-supported USAPA trying to fight the company (who by the way sees USAPA for what it is, a management blessing). Will a no-strike clause be the number one negotiating item when contract time comes around? It probably will, because USAPA cannot amass the funds necessary to carry off a strike. On the other side of the coin, suppose an ALPA carrier goes on strike and management orders the pilots to fly struck work or be fired? Will USAPA say privately, "Here's our chance to stick it to ALPA again" but publicly say, "We have to choose our battles and live to fight another day."?

Where USAPA's headed, a submarine sounds like the vessel of choice.

 

[Redmeat]

Please remind us of that sentiment when you see your underfunded under-supported USAPA trying to fight the company (who by the way sees USAPA for what it is, a management blessing). Will a no-strike clause be the number one negotiating item when contract time comes around? It probably will, because USAPA cannot amass the funds necessary to carry off a strike. On the other side of the coin, suppose an ALPA carrier goes on strike and management orders the pilots to fly struck work or be fired? Will USAPA say privately, "Here's our chance to stick it to ALPA again" but publicly say, "We have to choose our battles and live to fight another day."?

Where USAPA's headed, a submarine sounds like the vessel of choice.

Isn't THAT ALPA's montra as of late?!?!

Sadly I think strikes at airlines are a thing that will only be read about in history books no matter what union represents pilots.

 

[Bringupthebird]

If that's true, by all means, don't waste money on a union who's only influence will be a non-binding recommendation on the scrambled egg design on the hat brim.

The profession you enjoy is the direct result of pilots willing to walk away from it all in an effort to improve the pay and benefits.

 

[waveflyer]

It's true, it is. But when this career was built, airlines weren't under the cost pressures of deregulation and we weren't under the pressure of a castrating rla process that no politician has let us use for some time. Companies didn't use to be able to declare bankruptcy as easily and throw away contracts. I agree that the best way to combat this is with our feet- but who's willing to do that under our current seniority system.

ALPA has negotiated contract after contract that end loads the earnings- making seniority the number one thing financially, on top of the scheduling benefits- Noone is willing to start over at the bottom- b/c the wages are so unlivable there. Solve that problem- in any number of ways- and you'll see leverage return.

 

[Bringupthebird]

double

 

[Bringupthebird]

Huh? When this career was built airlines were restricted from markets they could serve. Delta used to whine incessantly to the CAB about how unfair it was that Eastern could operate on so many routes exclusively. Only certain carriers could operate trans-Altlantic/Pacific. It wasn't appreciably easier back then. But airlines were interested in expanding when the CAB allowed it and were unable to withstand a strike long-term. But the risk of a career during a strike always existed. Now, pilots would rather take a little less and make do with a smaller sailboat, than risk losing it all. It's not because of what anyone will or won't allow you to do, but what you are willing to stand for.

It always has been.