Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AGE 65 Victory Party

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Rez has done more for his fellow pilots than probably anyone else on this board besides Occam. What is your vast resume of experience in assisting your fellow pilots? I agree with you about the Age-60 issue and Prater's backstabbing of the membership, but don't attack pilots like Rez that have worked so hard to improve the lives of their fellow pilots.

I'm not trying to slam the guy. I'm just pointing out an ALPA fact. He says he wants to fix ALPA, so what he needs to eventually deal with is: Guys who talk like he does eventually turn into "Praters" and make a grab for themselves. It's great he wants to try to help. However, it's time to consider: Does anyone at ALPA today know what to do?? He's preaching fundamentals and I'm not sure they apply anymore. There has not been sufficient enough recent collective bargaining successes at ALPA for members to know a path back to broad increase. We still have pretty good resources available; ALPA is not bankrupt of money. What we are bankrupt of is is leadership. I've seen unions do better.
 
my turn to lecture, Rez.

Rez, rule #1 as a leader is to find a way to motivate those you wish to lead. You do that by emphasizing common ground, and connecting with them.

Bashing them, belittling them, and taking a holier-than-thou attitude is not working for you. Portions of your message have limited merit, but you you have rendered yourself irrelevant with your methods.

Welcome to my "ignore" list. Say hello to Pocono Pilot, Instructordude, General Lee, Tanker Clown and all the other FI rejects for me.
 
Last edited:
I spoke with a FX contact today... the way the company is handling the bid is BS... disapointed...
In my opinion, I am not disappointed in the way FedEx is handling the bid. They are doing what's smart from a business/financial standpoint. They are trying to keep the training costs/cycles down due to the inevitable backlash form this Age 60 debacle. My disappointment is not aimed at the company, but at few hundred over (and near) 60 types who think that an extra 3, 4, or 5 years of pay is worth the untold damage that this is causing to the 4000 plus other pilots junior to them at FedEx.
 
In my opinion, I am not disappointed in the way FedEx is handling the bid. They are doing what's smart from a business/financial standpoint. They are trying to keep the training costs/cycles down due to the inevitable backlash form this Age 60 debacle. My disappointment is not aimed at the company, but at few hundred over (and near) 60 types who think that an extra 3, 4, or 5 years of pay is worth the untold damage that this is causing to the 4000 plus other pilots junior to them at FedEx.


maybe if we worked more at our unions for no pay (including the same union who supported Age 65), we could make up for our financial loss with feelings of "teamwork," "sacrifice," and other such nonsense.
 
DW ran concession after concession after scope release after scope release= should he have kept his job? I don't care how tied his hands were- if we didn't oust him- what kind of message would that have sent management?
This is exactly the ignorance that got us stuck with Age-65 in the first place. DW didn't "run concession after concession." He merely signed contracts that large majorities at each airline voted in favor of. He hated those damned contracts. Point your finger back at yourself instead of pointing it at Duane. He just gave you what you asked for.
Prater at least has the very real negotiating leverage of saying "hey-i don't have a choice, they got rid of the last guy- i'm not going down that route". Prater has a learning curve though- He really screwed up on age 65 and waffling on the nic award.
Prater is incompetent. He never had the qualifications to do that job. He only got the position because of some back room politics of vote trading between legacy carriers at the BOD meeting.
I think good leadership happens first = then involvement comes.
Involvement, or lack there of, from the membership has been at a relatively constant level from ALPA's early days. No one can say that Captain Behnke wasn't a good leader, but the apathetic membership existed on his watch also. The fact is, pilots are just lazy and want to fly their trips and go home. They think they can just throw money at ALPA and expect the Association to solve all of their problems, and when it doesn't work that way, they get pissed off and start yelling at the leadership that actually took the initiative to get off their asses to get some work done.
 
The only real victory party going on here is the one they are having in D.C. You know those guys who voted 390-0 in favor of this law. I am sure they are at the club smoking fine cigars, and sipping brandy, giggling like mad over this moral crusade.

Oh please...you really think that the 390 representatives are celebrating over this vote? You're age preferences are really not all that important in an election year.

C'mon...this one is a minor one, being voted on at night, nothing more than clearing out the schedule before the Christmas break.

Those guys celebrate over the big votes...not minor ones like this one.

And where does this leave the 45 representatives that chose not to vote on this one at all?

Just a poll question...but how many of those 435 Representatives will be re-relected in November 2008? Of those that don't come back, I can assure you that it will not be due to a vote ( or not ) on a stupid little age change bill.

Big scheme of things...you really think the American public cares about the complaints of an airline pilot who works only 12 days a month and makes over $100,000 per year?

You are not that important...
 
a fairly good rebuttal

i think it's a matter of which will come first -- i happen to think pilots are dying for some leadership...

Agreed. Where does the leadership come from? Do we buy ALPA leaders from a mail order catalog? The internet? Where do they actually come from?

Again... I think we need to re-examine our expectations... Why do you think ALPA should be doing what you expect rather than what they are...

Also...

jke406 likes to belittle volunteer work, but how much do you want your dues to be so you don't feel compelled or guilt tripped into volunteering...?? 10% 20% of your income?






they are finding that the alpa institution does not inspire them. They feel they are swimming upstream.

I don't doubt they feel that way.... but what is ALPA to do... Its like a kid growing up with the rich kids thinking his Dad is loaded only to find out his Dad is really the chauffer and makes 30K a year...


DW ran concession after concession after scope release after scope release= should he have kept his job? I don't care how tied his hands were- if we didn't oust him- what kind of message would that have sent management?

Again... I hate to say it but a misaligned expectation on your part... the pilot groups of those CBA's agreed via democracy for those concessions. If DW said no, then it wouldn't be democracy...

Prater at least has the very real negotiating leverage of saying "hey-i don't have a choice, they got rid of the last guy- i'm not going down that route".

No he doesn't. Respectfully, justify your expectations.


Prater has a learning curve though- He really screwed up on age 65 and waffling on the nic award.

agreed...

It's not that we're never happy- it's that we're not happy w/ what's been going on in the RJ decade. the leadership has let our union look out for only the very senior and the very big, but has made promises to us all.

What promises? Can you reference them? Who made them?

Let's get back to volunteerism. Say for example at the next LEC meeting the only two guys running are an egomanic and a management suck up. You know they both suck and are going to do more damage than good.... what do you do?

This whole democracy thing that our founding fathers burdened us with... is so inconvienent....

Yet it is quite paradoxial.... As Americans we love to scoff and chide the socialist, dictators and communist. We reject them becuase we are free loving democratic people.... but when you look at unions and HOA's... all models of democracy set forth by our F. Fathers we fall short and flat on our faces.... all while at the same time we complain that our unions and neighborhoods suck. What's up with that?

As Americans and members of the greatest democratic nation in the world don't we have an obligation to particapte in democracy? Or is that obligation also a luxury to be apathetic?


That's not inspiring. I think good leadership happens first = then involvement comes. You think involvement should happen on it's own volition. I think that's unrealistic.

Where did the leadership come from? That is the big question. The 2006 BOD knew they could elected a new President that had been out of the game for 15+ years because the apathetic membership would do nothing....

The reason why Ghandi and MLKjr were so effective is because they had masses of people behind them... and they weren't even elected...

On May 7th 2006 we marched the Mall in Wash DC. Only 100 pilots showed up and they were the same ol suspects... the same old elected officers & leaders, Nat'l guys, (JP, PR, CB and BC), the same ol' MEC chairman, the same ol choir...... there were hardly any regular line pilots. Why?

If you think about thousands of pilots in uniform like we were... it would have gotten attention.

Now...tell me... this is for your career... why was no one there? Cause ALPA sucks? Is that spite at your own expense?


But let's get back to your comment:

That's not inspiring. I think good leadership happens first = then involvement comes.

So how long are you going to wait for good leadership? are you willing to wait for decades? 20 years? 30? Your career will be over by then? I don't know... I mean its your career....


Rez-- a simple question-- if minority leadership is such a problem- why hasn't someone in alpa leadership mandated the vote?

ie: require it.

Clearly state what you need and why you need it. All i hear is vagueness.

A mandated vote would not be democracy. it would be a dictatorship.

Minority leadership isn't the problem. Minority membership particaption and minority democracy is the problem... are the needs of the many spoken for by the few?
 
Last edited:
Again... I hate to say it but a misaligned expectation on your part... the pilot groups of those CBA's agreed via democracy for those concessions. If DW said no, then it wouldn't be democracy...

The pilot group at CCAir agreed via democracy that it was willing to take concessions to avoid being shut down...... DW ignored that democratic vote for a greater good.... How does that jive with the BS you just spouted......
 
I'm not trying to slam the guy. I'm just pointing out an ALPA fact. He says he wants to fix ALPA, so what he needs to eventually deal with is: Guys who talk like he does eventually turn into "Praters" and make a grab for themselves.

because I suggest you educate, particapte, speak your mind on the issues, vote, get on a committee and run for office? How is that a power grab on my part?




It's great he wants to try to help. However, it's time to consider: Does anyone at ALPA today know what to do?? He's preaching fundamentals and I'm not sure they apply anymore.

Funny... the new UAL MEC chair is going to back what worked in 1985 and 2000. Unity and active particaption. You mean to tell me that informed, educated, involved, supportive, angry, action orientated members doesn't apply anymore?

If not....what does? Let's hear it! If the fundamentals don't apply then what is the solution!! I don't care how we are effective... if you got another plan, a better plan... please propose!


There has not been sufficient enough recent collective bargaining successes at ALPA for members to know a path back to broad increase. We still have pretty good resources available; ALPA is not bankrupt of money. What we are bankrupt of is is leadership. I've seen unions do better.

But we just elected a new President! He is no good? Well who are the dumbasses that put him into power? The LEC reps? Well who put them into office? The membership? Well how many of them bothered to vote? 1/3? that is only a minority!

Do the 2/3s of the pilots bear any obligation here? Could they be part of the problem? If not. Why?
 
The pilot group at CCAir agreed via democracy that it was willing to take concessions to avoid being shut down...... DW ignored that democratic vote for a greater good.... How does that jive with the BS you just spouted......
DW refused to sign that agreement because it was negotiated in violation of the ALPA C & BLs. It was the equivalent of the Supreme Court striking down a law because it is unconstitutional. Pilot groups are free to negotiate what they want, provided it does not directly violate the C & BLs.
 
The pilot group at CCAir agreed via democracy that it was willing to take concessions to avoid being shut down...... DW ignored that democratic vote for a greater good.... How does that jive with the BS you just spouted......

You'd rather lawsuits that democracy eh Joe?

Same deal with Midway in RDU....Joey... no DFR there either... can you explain it?
 
DW refused to sign that agreement because it was negotiated in violation of the ALPA C & BLs. It was the equivalent of the Supreme Court striking down a law because it is unconstitutional. Pilot groups are free to negotiate what they want, provided it does not directly violate the C & BLs.


......so "democracy" didn't apply in this case...... Despite the fact that it harmed the CCAir pilots......
 
You'd rather lawsuits that democracy eh Joe?

Same deal with Midway in RDU....Joey... no DFR there either... can you explain it?

..... you said "democracy" trumps a veto of a concessionary contract...... Apparantly that wasn't the case for the CCAir pilots..... Selective "democracy" is the motto......
 
......so "democracy" didn't apply in this case...... Despite the fact that it harmed the CCAir pilots......
No, democracy worked perfectly in this case. Democracy created the C & BLs, and democracy can change them. The CCAir MEC easily could have requested a special vote by the BOD to change the ALPA policy on concessionary bargaining. Instead, they intentionally violated ALPA policy and attempted to force through a contract that they knew to be in violation. That's not a failure of democracy, that's a failure of their own leadership. The CCAir case was a textbook example of democracy and a system of governance. You many not like the democratically created rules of governance, but they are the rules.
 
No, democracy worked perfectly in this case. Democracy created the C & BLs, and democracy can change them. The CCAir MEC easily could have requested a special vote by the BOD to change the ALPA policy on concessionary bargaining. Instead, they intentionally violated ALPA policy and attempted to force through a contract that they knew to be in violation. That's not a failure of democracy, that's a failure of their own leadership. The CCAir case was a textbook example of democracy and a system of governance. You many not like the democratically created rules of governance, but they are the rules.

Doesn't alter the fact that a majority of pilots wishes were disregarded for the sake of the majority.....

Either don't sign concessionary agreements that affect all of regardless of the effect on others, or sign them all..... I doubt the CCAir issue would have gone the same way if it had been a large dues paying pilot group..... They were easy to sacrifice......

.....again.....selective democracy......

.....by the way, the CCAir leadership was better than the Mesa leadership..... but AH had the kneepads.....
 
Doesn't alter the fact that a majority of pilots wishes were disregarded for the sake of the majority.....
Just as there's a Constitution in this country that limits the powers of the government, there is a constitution that limits the powers of ALPA's governance. That's not a violation of the principles of democracy, because there is a system in said constitution to change it when necessary. You can keep pretending that democracy was violated here, but you and I both know that it wasn't.
 
Just as there's a Constitution in this country that limits the powers of the government, there is a constitution that limits the powers of ALPA's governance. That's not a violation of the principles of democracy, because there is a system in said constitution to change it when necessary. You can keep pretending that democracy was violated here, but you and I both know that it wasn't.

Were the majority of CCAir pilot's wishes granted by ALPA national? The simple answer is NO......

We can argue all day about whether or not that was the right thing to do, but the simple fact of the matter was that their wishes were disregarded for a greater good.....

The hypocrisy starts when you ALPA cheerleaders then claim that ALPA can't disregard what the pilots of an airline want..... They did exactly that in the CCAir case......
 
Were the majority of CCAir pilot's wishes granted by ALPA national? The simple answer is NO......
Of course not, because what they wanted was in violation of the democratically created C & BLs.
We can argue all day about whether or not that was the right thing to do, but the simple fact of the matter was that their wishes were disregarded for a greater good.....
It had nothing to do with "the greater good." It was simply a matter of them wanting something that was illegal under ALPA Bylaws. The Association cannot legally ignore its own Bylaws. Then people like you will file lawsuits. Only in that case, the lawsuits would actually be legitimate. That would be a change for you.
The hypocrisy starts when you ALPA cheerleaders then claim that ALPA can't disregard what the pilots of an airline want..... They did exactly that in the CCAir case......
If the pilots of CCAir had complied with the requirements of the Bylaws, then their request for concessions would have been signed by DW. Again, this isn't difficult to understand. A majority in Congress can vote tomorrow to outlaw all firearms, but the law won't stand because it's in violation of the Constitution of the United States. Likewise, when an MEC ignores the Bylaws of the union, they don't get their way. Part of a democracy is having a set of rules that are created through the democratic process and adhered to.
 
A majority in Congress can vote tomorrow to outlaw all firearms, but the law won't stand because it's in violation of the Constitution of the United States. Likewise, when an MEC ignores the Bylaws of the union, they don't get their way. Part of a democracy is having a set of rules that are created through the democratic process and adhered to.

...... but if Obama is elected, there will be a new makeup of the Supreme Court..... The new makeup will declare that the law is not in violation of the Constitution because they will say that a "well regulated militia" only applies to the military.....

Given this distinct possibility if Obama is elected, answer the following questions....

1. Will that law passed by Congress in your example still be "unconstitutional"?

2. Will you abide by that law if it is passed and Obama's Supreme Court upholds it?

3. Will you still support Obama?

4. What will you think of people like me who disregard the new law?

"Democracy" is always open to interpretation..... In your example, we may have it tested if your man is elected..... If we had a "Supreme Court" for ALPA, the CCAir case may have been different...... and there is no doubt it would be a different interpretation depending on who appointed the judges.......
 

Latest resources

Back
Top