ALPA Nat. DOES control MEC bargaining

[csmith]

Surplus1 quotes at the request of fins

By the way, an MEC cannot sue ALPA. The MEC is not a legal entity, but an internal component of the ALPA. That would therefore be the equivalent of ALPA suing ALPA. Not possible.

You are right of course. I was being facecous. Of course any individual, including an MEC member may bring lawsuit. That is neither here nor there in the dscussion.

The RJDC is arguing that ALPA failed to exercise or improperly exercised its right to the "last look" and should not have endorsed certain limited provisions of the Delta PWA or taken or failed to take other actions (unrelated to the Delta PWA) that it did.

You know, I was going to start another one our long winded replies, but there really is no point. You won't convince me and I won't convince you. So all we are really doing is taking up bandwidth.

Count me out. I've realized over the past couple of days that my initial reaction of staying out of it was correct. There is way too much time involved with just posting, let alone spending all day searching the net for a semblence of a hiccup in ALPA's daily routine in order to rush it here and start yet another long thread on the pitfalls of ALPA. One has to wonder where they would be today without ALPA.

So long folks, sorry for the intrusion.

CSmith

 

[RJFlyer]

csmith:

IMO the authority is delegated to the individual MECs. The responsibility rests with ALPA, and thus the final say.

This is precisely the point. Everything else you wanted to argue has no bearing on this point, and was simply wasted words. Yes, the MECs negotiate contracts, but ALPA/Duane Woerth's signature must be on it. They have the ultimate responsibility:

Main Entry: re·spon·si·bil·i·ty
Pronunciation: ri-"spän(t)-s&-'bi-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Date: 1786
1 : the quality or state of being responsible : as a : moral, legal, or mental accountability b : RELIABILITY, TRUSTWORTHINESS
2 : something for which one is responsible : BURDEN

ALPA is morally and legally accountable for all contracts negotiated under its auspices. ALPA fought in court to ensure that remains true. Therefore it cannot shirk its responsibility when politically expedient.

 

[surplus1]

Re: Please teach CSmith to use quotes!

Duane Woerth is running around saying 50 seats is a natural dividing line - ALPA don't want no uppidy RJ pilot getting off the Plantation in a 70 to 90 seat jet. I can hear the dogs barking outside the big house for those that escaped with the CRJ700's.

Interesting that you mention that. I have wondered several things along the way and have a few questions for your thoughts and those of everyone else. [I don't really need answers but just throw these out to make folks think a little]

1) Who decided that there had to be a "dividing line" at all (whether natural or unnatural) between major and regional? Why was a dviding line better than a uniting line?

2) How was the decision made about where that line should be?

3) Who decided that 50-seats was a "natural" dividing line? What is "natural" about it?

4) Why did they make that decision? Was it based on facts? If so what are those facts? Are they secret? If so, why?

5) Was anyone, anyone at all, employed by a "regional" carrier in ALPA, ever asked for an opinion about a) whether there should be a line and b) where that line should be? Do you suppose there is any record of that? If so, why is it kept secret?

6) Was this an arbitrary decision or did someone, somewhere, conduct an analysis (scientific or otherwise), a poll maybe or a vote that justifies this imaginary line? If they did, why is the analysis secret? The poll secret? The vote secret?

7) Why do some mainline pilot contracts demand merger when the Company buys another airline, but exclude merger if the airline has airplanes with less than 71-seats?

8) Who decided that "line" should be drawn? Who decided it should be 71 > = yes, 70 < = no? Why was that decision made?

9) Who decided that regional jets should be called "small jets"? Why?

10) Why do we have small, small jets; medium, small jets; large, small jets? How does a fellow like me (simpleton) tell the difference?

Bonus Q's: What is a regional jet? What is a small jet? When does a large, small jet become a small, large jet? Did you know that there are small, large jets, medium, large jets and large, large jets? Can you tell the differences?

Ohhhh, you're not from VA? I see, well that's why you can't tell a jet from a jet that's a jet and a jet from a jet that's not a jet. Hang in there. Nothing to worry about, you just have your jets crossed up. It'll all come to ya as soon as you've paid your dues. Then we'll teach ya all about the flows. They have their ups, backs and throughs. That's advance stuff, but you'll get it.

By allowing one group of ALPA members rights superior to other groups of ALPA members, he has exposed our union to incredible peril.

I know a "war story" that this reminded me of. Allow me to bore you with it.

Scene: Delegate Committee conference at ALPA Executive Board meeting. Circa 1989. EAL on strike. NWA contemplating strike.
Committee Chairman: UAL MEC Chairman
Delegates: 3 major airline pilots - 4 regional pilots. Gallery - 1 person.

MEC Chairman from small regional airline A speaks: Mr. Chairman, if NWA goes on strike and we have to shut down because of it, do you think ALPA could authorize strike benefits for our pilots along with those of NWA?

NWA MEC Vice Chairman responds: Of course not. ALPA can't afford that.

MEC Chairman from slightly larger regional B: Excuse me, but if ALPA can afford benefits for 6000 NWA pilots to strike, how come it can't afford benefits for 200 pilots at regional A?

NWA VC: That's different. They just aren't that important. Besides, they don't have the airplanes to fly our routes.

MEC Chair fm regional B: Well, you're right they don't have the airplanes to fly your routes but guess what? They have the pilots to fly your airplanes.

Committee Chairman: You speak revolution.

MEC Chairman fm regional B: No sir. I speak the survival of ALPA.

Committee Chairman: The meeting is in recess until XXXX.

At XXXX the meeting reconvened. The Gallery - standing room only. Among the gallery audience - 3 National Officers (including the President), 2 Major MEC Chairmen (DAL and AAA) [remember: UAL Chair = Committee Chair, NWA Chair represented by his Vice Chair already on committee] Director Representation, 3- ALPA lawyers. Many other staff and MEC Chairs from smaller majors.

Committee Chairman: We are discussing strike benefits. Any further discussion?

MEC Chairman fm. regional A: Mr. Chairman, I would like to withdraw my original question?

MEC Chairman fm regional B: Why is that, I thought you wanted to know what would happen to your people?

MEC Chairman frm regional A: Well I did at first, but not any more. I understand that we can't afford it.

Committee Chairman: Any further discussion? --- silence from the delegates.

Committee Chairman: Very well then, the question is withdrawn. Let's move on to the next issue.

ALPA President: Nice to see you gentlemen are making good progress. See you in plenary. ----- the president leaves. The gallery empties.

Footnotes: Regional airline A, was a codeshare partner of NWA, not based in DTW. As it turned out, NWA didn't strike that time around.

Times have changed, but then again they haven't.