A new way for ALPA to collect dues

[CopilotDoug]

How is ALPA democracy any different that our own American gov't...??

That's not a good thing, Rez...

 

[pkober]

You obviously don't know Prater. As everyone here knows, I'm not a fan of the guy, and I supported Captain Woerth 110%, but I know that John cares about newhire pay and wants to see it raised a great deal. He's not a one-man army, though.



The 2005 survey? Old news. Prater ran multiple new surveys after being elected. In none of the surveys (including the 2005 Woerth survey) did over 50% of the pilot bother to participate.



Are you kidding me? I voted in every single poll and election for the entire time I was a member. Hell, I told Prater to his face over a year ago that I thought he was handling Age 60 very poorly.

Big deal. I've told union leaders what I think also. The old survey is just an example of how ALPA-N doesn't listen to it's members.

Age 60 has really caused a lack of trust in ALPA-N. Most pilots believe that our national leaders don't care about there issues. It's the good old boy network at work. I've been in this union for a while, maybe longer than you, and I have never seen this level of discontent.

Don't get me wrong I have respect for my local. I just believe ALPA-N is a business.

Since I don't know Prater I am unable to critisize? Get real. He works for me and you, we pay his bloated salary. I'll say what ever I want about his leadership.

He can change the treatment of newhires. Because of his position he is more than just one man. He speaks for the union, like it or not. The problem is that he is not a leader. He is an administrator. A leader inspires his men, he doesn't.

Good luck to you.

 

[PCL_128]

Thirdly, do you have any cogent responses to any of the challenges to your ignorant comments that I or others have placed in your self-rightious lap?

I don't see any real challenges. Just a bunch of PFT nonsense. Do you have any real issues to discuss, or do you just want to pound your chest and act like a fool?

P.S. Are you the back door beeotch who complained about my avatar being too risque? I dare not offend your sensibilities.

Negative.

 

[PCL_128]

The old survey is just an example of how ALPA-N doesn't listen to it's members.

Actually, the old survey was a perfect example of ALPA listening to the members. The survey was conducted when Duane was in office, and he followed the guidance of the membership to the letter. Prater is a different story.

Age 60 has really caused a lack of trust in ALPA-N. Most pilots believe that our national leaders don't care about there issues. It's the good old boy network at work. I've been in this union for a while, maybe longer than you, and I have never seen this level of discontent.

I agree with you. Some actions of the leadership have caused lots of discontent over the past few years, especially the handling of the Age 60 issue. But remember, these are actions of specific leaders. The problem isn't the Association, the problem is the people placed in leadership positions. Replace the leaders, and the problems go away.

Don't get me wrong I have respect for my local. I just believe ALPA-N is a business.

Nah, ALPA's no business. This argument never holds water, because the overwhelming majority of the member pilot groups cost the union far more than they'll ever bring in in dues revenue. If ALPA wanted to behave like a business, they would kick out all of the B-carriers and only represent the legacies. I disagree with many of the current leadership's actions, but they aren't doing it because they view it as a business; they simply have different ideas about what a trade union should be doing.

He can change the treatment of newhires. Because of his position he is more than just one man. He speaks for the union, like it or not.

He is still one man. He can't control individual MECs. Each pilot group decides their own negotiating priorities. Prater has no power whatsoever to force an MEC to negotiate for higher newhire pay or anything else.

The problem is that he is not a leader. He is an administrator. A leader inspires his men, he doesn't.

I would argue that he isn't even a very good administrator. He's been a complete and utter failure in his position, just as I predicted in '06 when he was running for office. He isn't suited for the job, and he never was. He is certainly no leader. But the membership demanded "anybody but Duane," so that's exactly what they got. Happy with the results?

 

[spinproof]

I don't see any real challenges. Just a bunch of PFT nonsense. Do you have any real issues to discuss, or do you just want to pound your chest and act like a fool?



Negative.

OK how about extortion? Asset confiscation? I'm sure Herndon appreciates your efforts to obfuscate their folly.
They depend on a blind and willing proletariat. A position in which you revel with unceasing dribble.

 

[PCL_128]

OK how about extortion? Asset confiscation?

What about them? Collecting dues is not "extortion" or "asset confiscation."

 

[spinproof]

What about them? Collecting dues is not "extortion" or "asset confiscation."

Really!! How does my retirement assets become a source of revenue for ALPA? Under what Law?

 

[PCL_128]

Really!! How does my retirement assets become a source of revenue for ALPA? Under what Law?

Your retirement assets aren't being used for revenue. Your gross income is. They are simply calculating your dues based on gross income instead of subtracting out your 401(k) contributions beforehand. The money in your retirement account and all future earnings aren't being touched.

 

[spinproof]

Your retirement assets aren't being used for revenue. Your gross income is. They are simply calculating your dues based on gross income instead of subtracting out your 401(k) contributions beforehand. The money in your retirement account and all future earnings aren't being touched.

Really! Well Einstein you're reducing my retirement by 1.99%. In essence confiscating moneys that ALPA is not presently entitled to by contract.Which I say again under what law will ALPA be allowed to do this?

 

[PCL_128]

Really! Well Einstein you're reducing my retirement by 1.99%. In essence confiscating moneys that ALPA is not presently entitled to by contract.Which I say again under what law will ALPA be allowed to do this?

Again, you're still not understanding. The same amount of money is going in to your retirement account, and the same amount of money will grow there. This new dues structure doesn't change anything with your retirement. Example:

Old structure:

Gross Income - $50,000
Minus 401k - $2,500
Net subject to dues - $47,500
Dues (at 1.95%) - $926

New structure:

Gross Income - $50,000
Net subject to dues - $50,000
Dues (at 1.95%) - $975

As you can see, the only thing that changes is what number is used to calculate your 1.95%. You still contribute the $2,500 to your 401(k), and the money in your 401(k) is never touched. What changes is that you would net $49 less that year in your take-home paycheck. Your retirement account is never touched, and never affected.

 

[trainer8]

Again, you're still not understanding. The same amount of money is going in to your retirement account, and the same amount of money will grow there. This new dues structure doesn't change anything with your retirement. Example:

Old structure:

Gross Income - $50,000
Minus 401k - $2,500
Net subject to dues - $47,500
Dues (at 1.95%) - $926

New structure:

Gross Income - $50,000
Net subject to dues - $50,000
Dues (at 1.95%) - $975

As you can see, the only thing that changes is what number is used to calculate your 1.95%. You still contribute the $2,500 to your 401(k), and the money in your 401(k) is never touched. What changes is that you would net $49 less that year in your take-home paycheck. Your retirement account is never touched, and never affected.

If my math is correct, your example is less than a 2% employee contribution on $50K. A smart investor would, if he or she could, at least do the minimum to get a company match, usually 3%. If they are single and smart, they will max it out to 15%. I hope the same people are looking to use a Roth IRA and not hope Social InSecurity will be there for them at age 65. And, a lot of us contribute some $$$ to a Roth IRA with after tax money, which a portion now may be in ALPA's pocket.

Vote it down. It's your money! Not Captain Prater's

T8

 

[PCL_128]

If my math is correct, your example is less than a 2% employee contribution on $50K. A smart investor would, if he or she could, at least do the minimum to get a company match, usually 3%. If they are single and smart, they will max it out to 15%. I hope the same people are looking to use a Roth IRA and not hope Social InSecurity will be there for them at age 65. And, a lot of us contribute some $$$ to a Roth IRA with after tax money, which a portion now may be in ALPA's pocket.

Vote it down. It's your money! Not Captain Prater's

T8

Your math is incorrect. A $2,500 contribution from a $50,000 gross income is a 5% employee contribution. But that's not the point anyway. The point was that your retirement account is not a factor in the dues, your gross income is.

 

[spinproof]

Again, you're still not understanding. The same amount of money is going in to your retirement account, and the same amount of money will grow there. This new dues structure doesn't change anything with your retirement. Example:

Old structure:

Gross Income - $50,000
Minus 401k - $2,500
Net subject to dues - $47,500
Dues (at 1.95%) - $926

New structure:

Gross Income - $50,000
Net subject to dues - $50,000
Dues (at 1.95%) - $975

As you can see, the only thing that changes is what number is used to calculate your 1.95%. You still contribute the $2,500 to your 401(k), and the money in your 401(k) is never touched. What changes is that you would net $49 less that year in your take-home paycheck. Your retirement account is never touched, and never affected.

At the risk of putting everyone to sleep or worst that they run screaming from their collective rooms I'll try to make my point one last time.

Wrong! I'm $ 49 dollars poorer. Alpa is $49 richer. Alpa has done nothing for its $49 dollars. I on the other hand have endured fuel spikes, food spikes, possible furloughs and recessionary contracts. Explain to me how I must give up more money to a failed organization that can't operate under the same budget that I do.

That $ 49 dollars taken from me is equal to $819.54 @8% in 10years that I lost X 50,000 participants....time for Herndon to get on a diet. If they don't it'll turn into a famine! actually the time is now!!! Not one more penny not one! Pry it from my dying hands!

 

[PCL_128]

I give up. You just can't fix stupid.

 

[JoeMerchant]

When my budget comes up short, I cut spending....ALPA comes to the lowest paid members and asks for more money.....Let's start by cutting the Presidents pay.....