Age 60 Battle vs ALPA

[AAflyer]

She would leave a 40 year old Delta 767-400 FO for a 35 year old Comair (Mesa) Captain? Doubt it. Really, I doubt it. Even after a Chap 11 I would make 3 times what the Mesa guy would. And, she loves my computer skills and that I lift wieghts a lot. She does. Sorry.


Bye Bye--General Lee

Of course she would General, these guys all have big watches and wear their uniform to the grocery store, and anywhere else they can pick up chicks. The big thing you forget, they actually really fly for Delta! I have been told that by no less than 10 of them over the past 5 years. It was so funny to ask what equiptment they flew, and after they answered RJ I asked when they could fly the 737 I got a blank stare. The best response was "well, it doesn't work that way, and it is probably a little difficult to explain to you". I never told I flew for a living.

AA

Disclaimer, before all CMR guys jump all over me I am sure this was the select few I ran into that every airline has.

 

[SWPA Pilot]

Heck, I Just sent my "Shut up and just pay your Dues" T-shirt to GoodWill in January

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you. I'm thinking that you sold it to a pawn shop since you want the money so badly.

Wally,
Unity is not a one way street. If ALPA and my fellow members want my
support then they need to be my allies in keeping my job a long as I need it
and am qualified, not my adversaries. (Read ALPA's mission statement). One
does not rationally provide thousands of dollars a year to an organization
which aggressively supports getting him terminated because he has a
birthday; one spends that money funding an IRA. Additionally, one does not
support an opponent of their family's financial security in any way, shape,
or form.
I will be revoking my dues checkoff agreement in the very near future
in protest. If the age 65 amendment before Congress goes down in defeat I
will revoke my membership entirely and divert those funds to IRA's. If this
is what ALPA calls UNITY I'll be more than happy to eat alone. My support
of any job action under the current circumstances is doubtful at best. No
improvement in the contract can help me nearly as much as being able to keep
my job until I am financially secure for retirement, even under the current
contract. This issue trumps negotiations issues for me hands down.
Sincerely,
****** *****
**** **** MEM

If you and your imaginary friend don't want to be in the union, that's fine. Go join your little apaad.org secrect society. I'm betting once they ask for dues you will run.

Why should ALPA push to lift the age 60 rule when the majority doesn't want it? Should we make John Kerry president since the minority wanted him? If you don't like the age 60 rule, go up to Canada and work for one of their airlines.

 

[TonyC]

If you and your imaginary friend don't want to be in the union, that's fine. Go join your little apaad.org secrect society. I'm betting once they ask for dues you will run.

Why should ALPA push to lift the age 60 rule when the majority doesn't want it? Should we make John Kerry president since the minority wanted him? If you don't like the age 60 rule, go up to Canada and work for one of their airlines.

You are responding to an individual who removed himself from the process by resigning from the Collective Baragaining Agent, and now supports an individual that would scab.


Here's a response from a more level-headed voice:

Vice Chairman’s Message – August 23, 2005

Captain Wally Huggins, MEC Vice Chairman​

​

(FDX ALPA MEC)​

A Captain whom I respect very much stopped me recently in AOC to express his extreme displeasure with ALPA’s current stance on “Age 60” and the recent survey, which he perceived as biased. So disgusted is he that he said he was considering quitting ALPA. This man wears a “25 year” ALPA pin. I told him that I thought quitting was a bad idea, akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. He listened, and I believe he concurred with that assessment in the end. But I listened to him too; his frustration is profound. Here are some thoughts on the subject, prompted by this conversation and other correspondence that I have had with pilots who, like my friend, would like the option to fly past 60.



1) Perspective #1 – It’s interesting but some of the pilots with whom I have spoken who oppose changing “Age 60” thought that the ALPA campaign and survey were biased toward change. And many of the pilots I know who support the change believe that ALPA was prejudiced against change. It seems that the eye of the beholder has a lot to do with what’s perceived.



2) Perspective #2 – It is entirely possible that a person’s perspective will change with time. Myriad personal factors comprise the decision-making software that causes one to fall into one camp or the other. And that software is subject to change. Marriages, divorces, kids, schools, age… the list is almost endless of the factors that come into play that may affect outlook. So, in some cases, what’s true for some one day may not be so cast in stone the next.



3) Quitting the Union… bad idea. A large, complex organization can be a poor entity for dealing with specific – and meaningful – parochial interests. ALPA definitely has an issue still outstanding, even given the last survey. “Age 60” is a dynamic issue with which our Association will have to continue to come to terms, by virtue of its members, or maybe the law (someday), or both. But big organizations also have their good points, particularly noticeable when you’re trying to negotiate a contract. And ladies and gentlemen, here at FedEx we are trying to negotiate our second CBA in a very challenging environment. Yes, retirement age is an issue that will continue to have to be addressed but to hold membership hostage to personal satisfaction on the issue is somewhat analogous to Americans leaving for Canada (or saying they will) when their favorite politician finishes second. In the end, it is always very hard to steer a boat from the water.


Additionally, it is very difficult to negotiate a contract for everyone when some of that “everyone” is deciding to feud over special interests. I have read that some think that resolving the “Age 60” issue (in their favor) will have a “unifying” effect on the pilots and help us deal, as an institution, with our management and our negotiations. I don’t see that happening. I believe that resolution to this issue lies in the long-term, through a civilized democratic process, not through the imposition of what is, for now, the will of the minority.



As is the case with many things, timing is an important facet of resolving this debate. Those who insist on trying to divide the pilots at this time, over this issue, are, I think, ill-advised. Let’s hang together through our negotiations and resolve this fraternal debate after we get our contract; for this contract, one way or the other, is going to directly and unequivocally reflect our ability to do just that.

And another:

Vice Chairman's Message

(FDX ALPA MEC)​

​

August 25, 2005​

Well, if e-mail responses are any indicator, the "Age 60" issue is one that polarizes thought process in a New York minute. The last Vice Chairman's Message that broached the subject struck a nerve with many.

And that is exactly the point. If I was employed by management to distract and divide the FedEx pilots during contract negotiations, I believe that I would "glom on" to an issue like this and use it to my advantage. I would use it as a wedge issue and make it the eye of the storm hoping that the discontent among some would spiral into a storm and, along the way, let the major issue sweep us and other less coalesce consequential differences among us to help break down focus and unity regarding negotiations.

In a couple of e-mails that I have received "Age 60" has served as an apparent launching point for pilots to express other sources of dissatisfaction with "ALPA", sometimes to the point of getting personal.

Naturally, any member of the MEC is certainly subject to criticism. It goes with the territory and is healthy and natural. And, members who pay dues are very much within their rights to express their opinions. In fact, such expressions are almost obligatory for members who hope to own their Association and the process. But, "process" is the operative word here, not ad homonym attacks or ultimatums.

"PROCESS" – n. a method of operation. What a concept. My thanks go to the e-mailers who thought the last V.C. message was on target. But, to those less enchanted or convinced, I offer… "Process". Members in good standing who would hope to change a minority opinion into a majority opinion have a process at their disposal. And it works. It starts with your LEC. Any member in good standing can avail himself to this way of doing business and it is the best way to change things vs. just protesting.

I have my opinions on "Age 60" and freely share them, in decision-making venues and elsewhere. I personally do not subscribe to the idea that "Age 60" is only about safety, but I do not believe that actions that cause harm or distraction to our Union are the smartest, or even most effective way, to change the status quo.

"Age 60' will ultimately resolve itself within the Association, by virtue of the members of the Association. This may happen in the relative short-term or it may take a while. In the meantime, as negotiations press on, some, it seems, intend to use their own feelings on the issue to strike out at "the Union", "the officers", or whomever, because resolution of their premier issue isn't progressing as they would like.

If you do not like "ALPA's" position on this issue, or any other, the first thing you need to do is to understand that you are "ALPA". The second thing to do would be to develop cogent arguments that would accrue to the benefit of, and convince, a majority of pilots. Step three would be to put those ideas in writing. Fourth, bring those ideas forth, in the form of resolutions, to your governing body (that would be your LEC). Lastly, and most importantly, you should be prepared to win, or lose, your case in a forum of open debate and majority rule.



I have, and will continue to have, opinions about this issue, the attendant information campaign and the resultant survey. And, my LEC leadership will know that opinion when we next convene. But, my resolve is to have this issue vetted internally, on a floor open to all opinions and yet obliged to acknowledge only one… the majority. It has to be that way. Anything short of that is anarchy, and if I was that aforementioned corporate management employee looking to boost my MBO bonus, that is exactly what I would be looking for among the pilots.

Right now, I want a contract and an intact Union at the end of the day. I want a reasonable and responsible acknowledgement, in writing and in $$$, of the efforts of the "average" line pilot. I want it yesterday. Others, it seems, want resolution on this one issue at any cost, and in their favor; negotiations notwithstanding.

Web sites, chat rooms, nasty e-mails and/or quitting ALPA won't change a thing. A little courtesy, spirited debate and democratic resolution will, to the ultimate chagrin of those waiting for "ALPA" (and our contract negotiations) to implode.

Thanks for your time.

There is a process. Participate, or shut up.

 

[FoxHunter]

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you. I'm thinking that you sold it to a pawn shop since you want the money so badly.



If you and your imaginary friend don't want to be in the union, that's fine. Go join your little apaad.org secrect society. I'm betting once they ask for dues you will run.

The ALPA dues is peanuts if you got what you thought you were getting. You're not.

BTW if your concerned about my "imaginary friend" I suggest you check with Wally.

 

[FoxHunter]

You are responding to an individual who removed himself from the process by resigning from the Collective Baragaining Agent, and now supports an individual that would scab.


Here's a response from a more level-headed voice:




And another:




There is a process. Participate, or shut up.

Tony, your real quick to call someone a scab. How many times have you been on strike as an ALPA pilot? I believe that individual may have been a striker in one of ALPAs longer strikes. I've been on strike twice, both short, and both sucessful.

I happen to be part of the process. As a member not supporting the party line you are subject to being brought up on charges by the union. That happend to one Tiger guy when we were dealing with Wolfman. I had little sympathy for the Embassy Suites group which this individual was involved. Turned out they were correct, big mistake to trust the leadership.

If I hear the rooster early in the morning I know the sun is, or is about to come up. That rooster does not make the sun come up, he just gives you a little wakeup call. I'm your rooster.

 

[PanelApe]

Age 60.....

The age 60 rule was reviewed by ALPA. They presented the issue to everyone, they educated everyone, they polled their members and they put it to a vote.

Vote your peace. Vote the way you think is correct, be an advocate for your position. But remember - you are just but one vote. One opinion of many. Regardless of how many strikes you have been a part of, or how many more you will endure.

There are people on both sides of the issue. Approaching Age 60 with 20 years in the company, lots of vacation, widebody captain pay - don't want to stop flying. Others who are 25, junior on the list, sitting in the back of the Boeing. There are others still who are furloughed, pilots who paid their dues who did not get a chance to vote. Each with their own opinion, some get one vote.

They voted, the results are in.

Bottom line: You vote what you believe in. You hope the results go your way. IF so - great. If not - that is the way the process works.

I know that people have strong opinions on the issue. But that is just ONE opinon. There is someone out there that feels just as strongly as you, in opposition. That doesn't make them wrong - only in opposed to your position.

But you have an opportunity to say your peace, get your opinion out there and try to convince people to vote your way.

Unless of course you aren't a member - then you need to shut your pie hole and quit your belly-aching. You don't have a speaking part in this play. The only thing worse than someone who doesn't contribute to the process is someone who sits on the sidelines and belly-aches about the results. If you don't pay dues and are not part of the process - you don't have a valued opinion. You may have an opinion - it just is not valued.

 

[Los1]

Panel Ape-

You hit the proverbial nail on the head!!
well said
Los1

 

[TonyC]

EX-ACTLY!


Most of us learned about the democratic process in grade school, both in the classroom and on the playground. Apparently, there are some folks out there that either A) did NOT learn about democracy, B) are so old and senile they forgot how democracy works, or C) are too selfish to care about how democracy is supposed to work.

My assessment is C).




.

 

[Semore Butts]

Par for the course

No surprises here.

The young guys screaming about getting rid of the old guys. They know all about being 60 except they haven't been to 50 yet!

Remember how smart yo were when you were 18? Then you hit 21 and realized what a dumbass you were at 18? Well that formula continues throughout your life.

Send them to corporate? (I guess life is easy over there) We hire alot of old guys where I work, and boy is it an eye opener for them. After about 6 months they either quite or they adapt.

There are a buttload of "old guys" in the guard and reserve flying combat missions in the mid east as we speak.

What we need is a system to monitor the health of all pilots regardless of their age, oh wait? We have that already! The Flight Physical.

It bugs me that you young guys could be so greedy and short sighted. If you are lucky, you will live to be an old guy, I hope you do.

I'm not worried though, as you mature your head will probably pop free of your ass.


Good luck be safe.

 

[hoya saxa]

I'm your rooster.

Well, you're definitely a c@ck!! Now back to your sandbox with all your toys crybaby.