Alpa

[charlie2]

Why do you think such an important issue wasn't put out to a line pilot vote? Do the reps think they aren't smart enough to fully grasp what they would be voting on? I really wonder if it had gone to a vote it might have been a very differant outcome.

 

[swa737-700]

Having done some work for ALPA on our property and at National, I'd like to offer up that ALPA ain't the enemy here. What Airtran pilots do or do not do according to their bylaws really isn't up to ALPA National. Its up to the Airtran MEC. The NPA or whoever was there prior could have done the same thing.

Feel free to hash out your own troubles, but there has been no bigger safety advocate or supporter of the airline career than ALPA. I have personally visited dozens of senate and house offices discussing the FAA reauthorization bill, hazardous cargo issues, etc along with a bunch of other hard working LINE pilots. No organization is perfect, and I didn't like the Age 60 support by either ALPA or SWAPA. But c'mon...a lot of what is GOOD in airline contracts came from years of ALPA efforts. Places like FedEx (non union until early 90s) and SWA (in house union) modeled many of the aspects of their contracts on what other carriers had...which came with the help from ALPA. So--fight if you want about your lists, but if you are going to keep bashing ALPA don't forgot that TCAS, ASAP, FOQA, and a host of other good things in this industry have gotten a lot of support and voice on the Hill because of ALPA's efforts. I don't think any organization will ever be able to make 50,000 pilots completely satisfied, but ignoring the contributions the organization has made over the years is short sighted and overlooks a lot of positive history.

Um, excuse me, but there is that pesky lawsuit that alpo lost...all because national misled the TWA pilots. National marches to the beat of a different drummer as compared to the locals they supposedly represent.

 

[scoreboardII]

Originally Posted by AlbieF15
But c'mon...a lot of what is GOOD in airline contracts came from years of ALPA efforts.

Albie, If you are now into that ALPA machine and running the safety side, good on you, I applaud your efforts to help.

But, I'm calling you out on this one, please clarify with some of the GOOD ALPA has done for ALPA pilot contracts?

Is it PBS?

Stand-up overnights?

Retirement plans turned over to the US Government?

Furloughs?

If ALPA contracts are so good, why did Cactus/USair debacle happen?

Why did TWA get screwed?

Why did ALPA outsource 30% of all flying to subcontractors?

You mention safety, which CEO do you think wants to pack one in? Is that a good business decision to be unsafe and allow that to happen?

There is nothing in the SWAPA contract with SWA that you can point to and say "hey, thanks ALPA".

Correction, we actually have a Section 1 which prevents domestic codeshare, so in essence, the failings of ALPA provided us the leverage to get it done, thanks ALPA.

 

[TWA Dude]

ScoreboardII:

Your criticisms are all over the place and serve to dilute the anti-ALPA message. Specific contract complaints come at the local MEC level and no other unions are likely to achieve anything better. TWA got screwed because we had no leverage and the other ALPA carriers didn't give a damn. (In other words, Woerth didn't act without acquiescence of the EB/EC). The AWA/US debacle happened because the US Air pilots have no integrity.

The bottom line is that when times are tough whichever union is in power is the easy target. "Why didn't they prevent ...?" When times are good most pilots are happy with their union. Please don't confuse me as pro-ALPA. I'm simply a pragmatist who's been a member of IBT, APA, ALPA at three different carriers, and now the fornicating joke of a union called USAPA. My opinion is that ALPA is the worst union in the world -- except for all the rest.

 

[scoreboardII]

Point taken.

 

[Marko Ramius]

The op's point about ALPA merger policy makes no sense. The policy doesn't favor one method over another and gives no promises in Arby. All it really does is essentially formalize the process that it took SWA/SWAPA/ATALPA quite a bit of time to agree to in their process agreement by giving a timeline for events to occur in both SLI and JCBA. i could go on, but why considering the policy is only applicable to a merger between two ALPA carriers? All it says in other cases is that the president will take reasonable steps to seek acceptance of a procedure that will lead to a fair and equitable resolution for the parties. It doesn't even specify arbitration and fair and equitable is already recognized as being in the eye of the beholder and not perfect earlier in the document where it establishes national as a neutral. Nothing really eye opening to me in the policy itself, but it seems to me that the Op, SWA, and several WN pilots on here believe that SLI's should effectively left up to the acquiring carrier's management within the bounds of that carrier's cba if any provisions apply. That's essentially been SWA/SWAPA's history on the matter so it's not surprising, but talk about one size fits all! I guess it would have been great in a vacuum for guys like me and Andy as the likelihood of the UA/US merger in 2000/2001 going through quickly would have skyrocketed and we'd be 'merrily' sitting on top of thousands of UsAirways guys, many on the streets calling them our brothers once they 'earned' the uniform. (In reality the earlier merger would have gone through and most of us would never have been hired, but that wasn't really my point.)

I think a big problem with ALPA for both ALPA and non ALPA pilots is the connotation of the word ALPA itself. When you say SWAPA, APA, IPA or usapa you instantly think of an individual carriers union, but when most pilots say ALPA they often think of national more than the individual MEC's where much of the good and bad stuff contract/integration wise has occurred. Individual pilots also use the blanket term ALPA as a catch all for things that they either don't understand or failed to get involved with until the train left the station. Such actions will hurt you with any representation.

Most of us on these boards have been hired in the last 10-15 years, during a dark time for the profession and therefore are largely cynical about representation. That's a narrow view because it ignores the larger picture of what should be a 20-30 year career for most of us and how we got such benefits in the first place. Beyond that though, being cynical isn't necessarily bad or unwarranted but it's what most pilots do with that cynicism that gets me. They don't stay informed or get involved, they simply whine on message boards or in the cockpit about what's being 'done' to them and/or willingly commit themselves to acts that make matters worse out of resignation and sometimes spite. I'm not even talking about being involved as a volunteer, I'm talking about things like reading your ALPA mail, going to meetings, actually reading the contracts/loa's put in front of you, contacting your reps instead of flight info, and keeping an eye on who's in office for you. Like others have said, ALPA is far from perfect but it is us and currently it represents the bulk of a pilot force that acts like much the country. Loudly whining on the news or other social media, falling into corners based off talking points, and largely doing nothing outside of said whining. ALPA is us, so is SWAPA, APA, IPA, IBT, and usapa.

 

[scoreboardII]

Well said.

 

[Andy]

Well said.

When Marko Ramius posts, it's best to read his opinion. It's always well thought out.

Between Kalifornia's and Marko's posts on this thread, I have reevaluated my deeply embedded anger toward ALPA. It's not healthy and it doesn't resolve any of my complaints against the organization. I am now formulating a method to turn my frustration into a positive force for change once I'm back on the line. That, and I'm digging through legal rulings on their failure to comply with Duty of Fair Representation.
At United, there were 2172 of us furloughed on the first go and 1437 currently on furlough. Not all of us will return but almost all of us have quite a bit of anger over the way multiple issues were handled by our union. If we're able to stay on property long enough, we have the potential to become a very potent force within the framework of the union.

 

[The Prussian]

Andy...well stated, and you've certainly earned that right.

 

[Jetjockey]

The op's point about ALPA merger policy makes no sense. The policy doesn't favor one method over another and gives no promises in Arby. All it really does is essentially formalize the process that it took SWA/SWAPA/ATALPA quite a bit of time to agree to in their process agreement by giving a timeline for events to occur in both SLI and JCBA. i could go on, but why considering the policy is only applicable to a merger between two ALPA carriers? All it says in other cases is that the president will take reasonable steps to seek acceptance of a procedure that will lead to a fair and equitable resolution for the parties. It doesn't even specify arbitration and fair and equitable is already recognized as being in the eye of the beholder and not perfect earlier in the document where it establishes national as a neutral. Nothing really eye opening to me in the policy itself, but it seems to me that the Op, SWA, and several WN pilots on here believe that SLI's should effectively left up to the acquiring carrier's management within the bounds of that carrier's cba if any provisions apply. That's essentially been SWA/SWAPA's history on the matter so it's not surprising, but talk about one size fits all! I guess it would have been great in a vacuum for guys like me and Andy as the likelihood of the UA/US merger in 2000/2001 going through quickly would have skyrocketed and we'd be 'merrily' sitting on top of thousands of UsAirways guys, many on the streets calling them our brothers once they 'earned' the uniform. (In reality the earlier merger would have gone through and most of us would never have been hired, but that wasn't really my point.)

I think a big problem with ALPA for both ALPA and non ALPA pilots is the connotation of the word ALPA itself. When you say SWAPA, APA, IPA or usapa you instantly think of an individual carriers union, but when most pilots say ALPA they often think of national more than the individual MEC's where much of the good and bad stuff contract/integration wise has occurred. Individual pilots also use the blanket term ALPA as a catch all for things that they either don't understand or failed to get involved with until the train left the station. Such actions will hurt you with any representation.

Most of us on these boards have been hired in the last 10-15 years, during a dark time for the profession and therefore are largely cynical about representation. That's a narrow view because it ignores the larger picture of what should be a 20-30 year career for most of us and how we got such benefits in the first place. Beyond that though, being cynical isn't necessarily bad or unwarranted but it's what most pilots do with that cynicism that gets me. They don't stay informed or get involved, they simply whine on message boards or in the cockpit about what's being 'done' to them and/or willingly commit themselves to acts that make matters worse out of resignation and sometimes spite. I'm not even talking about being involved as a volunteer, I'm talking about things like reading your ALPA mail, going to meetings, actually reading the contracts/loa's put in front of you, contacting your reps instead of flight info, and keeping an eye on who's in office for you. Like others have said, ALPA is far from perfect but it is us and currently it represents the bulk of a pilot force that acts like much the country. Loudly whining on the news or other social media, falling into corners based off talking points, and largely doing nothing outside of said whining. ALPA is us, so is SWAPA, APA, IPA, IBT, and usapa.

Very well put sir.