ALPA 401k vote.

[JoeMerchant]

That really surprised me. I'm sure Tom still has some influence, but his MEC was always independent minded and had no problems disagreeing with him when they felt necessary. I disagree with their votes, but I'm sure they voted their conscience.

I doubt their votes reflected the views of their members.....

 

[PCL_128]

I doubt their votes reflected the views of their members.....

That's probably true, and that's why I disagree with their votes. But maybe they know their members better than we do. I haven't really heard any outcry from the MSA pilots like I have from the ASA, PSA, and other regional pilots. I guess it's always possible that they agreed with the change. I doubt it, though.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Boys.... read my first sentence... the BOD made the right choice .....for the wrong reason..... If one cares to do so... read any post I made on the 401k vote and it is clear that I have supported the membership on this issue...

Please clarify why this was "the right choice for the wrong reason".....

The question now is.... with less operating funds, the satiated membership will expect ALPA to do more with less... and of course when ALPA does not because it has a big gaping AAAhole in its budget... the ALPA haters will jig with glee at its ineffectiveness....

Like the federal govt...more money doesn't fix things.....If ALPA hadn't ignored seniority issues, AAA wouldn't be gone....ALPA is fundamentally broken...and more money won't fix that...

Anyone tempted to hit reply to this post: the debate is over the reasoning and logic to deny funding..

Same reason I don't want to send more of my hard earned money to Washington DC....They will simply waste it....There are sufficient funds right now....It is leadership that is lacking....not dollars...

First... what is the reasoning for ALPA to align the dues formula? Fairness for all and most importantly recover some lost funds from AAA. Also note that this process has been in the works for years.. it is not a knee jerk reaction to the AAA gaffe. But AAA is a valid point...

Fine....exempt all members from paying dues on their 401k....Don't take more from those at the bottom of the industry....Funny how most of you support Obama....Why not just tax those who make the most in ALPA....After all that would be what the Democratic Party suggests...

Second.....what is the reasoning for the membership to reject the 401k dues? Emotional satisfaction. Members feel that they are not getting value for their dues money.. so why give more? There maybe some truth to that however, most members function on self interests and treat ALPA as service business with paradigms of 100% guarantees and the customer is always right.... straight from the shopping mall.

You yourself just admitted we may not be getting our monies worth...fix that and we can talk.....

But the fact remains that ALPA will not be able to provide as good as it could due to the loss of the 401k vote...

BS....more money won't fix the problems within ALPA....Seniority issues, lack of contract minimums, independant bargaining, lack of brand scope, and absolutely no collective interests have resulted in the current quagmire...more money won't fix these problems...

So while the members get to feel good 'cause they stuck it to the man' they themsleves are going to get stuck with decreased career protections... which of course they'll write off anyway cause the avg self interest based member feels that ALPA doesn't do jack anyway... which gets back to the whole arguement of perceptions....

Giving ALPA more money won't protect my job as a career ASA pilot.....I want my company to get bigger and fly larger airplanes.....ALPA doesn't want that....

Again.. the BOD played politics and chose the lesser of the two evils... emotion based backlash or a fair method of dues collection...

Democracy worked just fine girls.....

Then why are you complaining about the result? Democracy worked....You should be happy....but your not...Why is that?

 

[PCL_128]

If ALPA hadn't ignored seniority issues, AAA wouldn't be gone

ALPA didn't ignore any seniority issues at AWA/AAA.

I want my company to get bigger and fly larger airplanes.....ALPA doesn't want that....

If you want to fly bigger airplanes, go to an airline that flies bigger airplanes. ASA is a feeder carrier, and it will always be a feeder carrier. You knew that when you made the decision to stay there for a career, so don't be bitter that you'll always be flying an RJ or its replacement in years hence.

 

[JoeMerchant]

ALPA didn't ignore any seniority issues at AWA/AAA.

ALPA has ignored taking longevity into consideration with merger policy....At one time it was based on DOH...that changed when "career expectations" took over....."Career expectations" is a losing method if you want to build solidarity.....

Telling a 20 year AAA pilot he goes below a 5 year AWA pilot is going to be a show stopper despite the "career expectations" argument.....

If you want to fly bigger airplanes, go to an airline that flies bigger airplanes. ASA is a feeder carrier, and it will always be a feeder carrier. You knew that when you made the decision to stay there for a career, so don't be bitter that you'll always be flying an RJ or its replacement in years hence.

Why should I have to give up my seniority and longevity to fly bigger airplanes? Because YOU say so? You and I will never agree on this issue....However you need to understand that somewhere in the neighborhood of 35% of regional pilots have decided to make a career out of their current job.....Probably a little higher at ASA and CMR....

You aren't going to build a cohesive union group when you tell a large percentage of the membership that they don't really fly for "real" airlines and they don't deserve to fly bigger airplanes.....Again, I'm not going to change your mind....but you need to understand why so many of us are pulling on the other end of the rope.....We aren't on you side...

We can either get on the same side or pull in opposite directions.....Your choice....or at least ALPA's choice....You aren't even part of ALPA anymore....You work for that large regional down the concourse......

 

[PCL_128]

ALPA has ignored taking longevity into consideration with merger policy....At one time it was based on DOH...that changed when "career expectations" took over....."Career expectations" is a losing method if you want to build solidarity.....

Telling a 20 year AAA pilot he goes below a 5 year AWA pilot is going to be a show stopper despite the "career expectations" argument.....

Until a national seniority list is implemented (read: never), DOH can have no place in SLIs. ALPA merger policy takes many aspects into consideration and provides guidance to arbitrators. It's a good system. The AAA pilots are just a bunch of overgrown children.

Why should I have to give up my seniority and longevity to fly bigger airplanes?

Because you don't fly for an airline, you fly for a lift provider that is limited by the scope of your mainline partners. It's your choice to work for such a company, so don't complain.

You work for that large regional down the concourse......

That "large regional" that I fly for gives me control in my contract over the FL code. If you want to fly airplanes of unlimited size, then you'll have to go work for such a company. Until then, stop whining.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Until a national seniority list is implemented (read: never), DOH can have no place in SLIs. ALPA merger policy takes many aspects into consideration and provides guidance to arbitrators. It's a good system. The AAA pilots are just a bunch of overgrown children.

DOH once had a place in ALPA merger policy...It was changed by the elephants.....Argue your position all you want...but don't expect everyone to hold hands and sing Kumbaya with you......Longevity in the industry needs to be recognized.....

Because you don't fly for an airline, you fly for a lift provider that is limited by the scope of your mainline partners. It's your choice to work for such a company, so don't complain.

Really?....I don't fly for an airline? Do the the Cargo "lift providers" fly for an "airline"?....or is that different?

Again....you are entitled to your opinion as am I and others who fly for ASA, CMR, etc.....We don't agree with you and won't pull in the same direction....That is something you ALPA cheerleaders need to understand...but it is obvious that you don't......

That "large regional" that I fly for gives me control in my contract over the FL code. If you want to fly airplanes of unlimited size, then you'll have to go work for such a company. Until then, stop whining.

Sorry.....I can't afford the paycut..I'll just try and grow my company instead while you whine about it....

 

[twinbeech]

Come on mainline guys... I am no longer an airline guy at all, so I will offer a somewhat unbiased opinion. If this would have passed, quite a few regional airlines would have most likely decertified ALPA as well. As much as you like to piss on the RJ types, you most likely were one, or you were the people who allowed them to prosper in the first place. Regardless of that, if enough of them "seceded from the union", you could be in a world of sh*t from a monetary standpoint. If you think it hurt with US Air leaving, imagine ASA, Comair, Mesaba, Pinnacle, PSA, Piedmont, Air Wisconsin, Mesa, TSA, ect all leaving at the same time. The suck would be incredible!

(Note that I have been out of the loop for a while, so my list of dissenters may not be accurate.)

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

I would like to see a breakdown of dues paid and money/services received. My unedumacated guess is in JB's words "the 5 elephants" pay more than the others combined. But the multitude of regionals, nationals get the same benefits. For the record I am ok with that as its the right thing.

Come on mainline guys... I am no longer an airline guy at all, so I will offer a somewhat unbiased opinion. If this would have passed, quite a few regional airlines would have most likely decertified ALPA as well. As much as you like to piss on the RJ types, you most likely were one, or you were the people who allowed them to prosper in the first place. Regardless of that, if enough of them "seceded from the union", you could be in a world of sh*t from a monetary standpoint. If you think it hurt with US Air leaving, imagine ASA, Comair, Mesaba, Pinnacle, PSA, Piedmont, Air Wisconsin, Mesa, TSA, ect all leaving at the same time. The suck would be incredible!

(Note that I have been out of the loop for a while, so my list of dissenters may not be accurate.)

 

[SaturnPilot]

Regardless of that, if enough of them "seceded from the union", you could be in a world of sh*t from a monetary standpoint. If you think it hurt with US Air leaving, imagine ASA, Comair, Mesaba, Pinnacle, PSA, Piedmont, Air Wisconsin, Mesa, TSA, ect all leaving at the same time. The suck would be incredible!

ALPA would actually come out ahead in that scenario (monetarily). The regionals generally receive more money from ALPA then they contribute. Dues revenue would dramatically decrease, but expenses would decrease further, resulting in a net gain.

I do agree the BOD made the right choice, however.