ASA Furlough Fund

[Speedtape]

Basically, alpa made a mistake by taking guys off probation on their anniversary and then sent them a ballot. we got an email telling us to vote and thus some of us assumed we were eligible and voted. It isnt like we went to the polls with fake IDs and voted for dead people. Honest systematic mistakes all around. It happened, lets fix it and move on.

Exactly! This was not your fault. Apparently, it was a change in our contract that did not get communicated. No one had bad intentions or was trying to pull a fast one. You and others were simply exercising your vote, assuming that SOMEONE knew what they were doing!

Hey! At least you voted, that's more than about 1400+ others did, and they are the ones who will be assessed. And for those who told you that you should have known better--tell them to kiss the blarney stone! Had I been in your shoes, I would have voted also. You were acting in good faith thinking you were an Active member with full voting rights. Had you been an Active Member under the old contract, you not only could have voted, but your vote would have had to been counted and there would be no argument!

I doubt that there was enough in your case, that it will change the results.

 

[JumpersAway]

Do you understand the Time Value of Money principle? Over time 5 here,10 here, 20 here sucks. In a good account it adds the F up in 40 years. You have a mortage, why not pay a little more every month? You may need it when you get laid off or lose your medical. Looks like you could use a money manager!

Then that's fantastic. I'm glad to see that you have the foresight and fortitude to invest for your future- it's obvious that through your superior money management skills, you will have the fundage for the furlough fund.....................Glad to see you planned for such an event.

 

[maxcackel]

Perfect example of the ME generation. James your arrogance as a first year f.o. is killing me. I could not imagine saying the thing's you have on the alpa board of here when I was hired, or now for that matter. And your vote is a major conflict of interest, end of story.

 

[Texx]

Moreover, when the "elegible pilots to vote" on the roll were assembled for some list, somewhere between 6 and 15 pilots were included that should not have been included under the new contract language on probationary period. It was an honest oversight by the staff, that has no dog in the fight, and were going through the motions of running an election that is usually somewhat routine.

It's more like 70 pilots.
Is that a firm number?

All you have to do is take Feb18, 2009 and roll it back 1 year plus 60 days (for all training and IOE) and see what DOHs would fall in that window. Those pilots are still on probation when it came to this vote.

117 pilots approx.

 

[Texx]

I think we need to focus not on the error of one but the error of the way the vote was handled.

 

[Speedtape]

Then that's fantastic. I'm glad to see that you have the foresight and fortitude to invest for your future- it's obvious that through your superior money management skills, you will have the fundage for the furlough fund.....................Glad to see you planned for such an event.

No, if I had my guess, he has taken a bath in his investment world, just like everyone else. My investments are worth Half of what they were a year ago--and I didn't even get a kiss or the K-Y!

 

[JumpersAway]

I think we need to focus not on the error of one but the error of the way the vote was handled.

I totally understand what you are saying, however, I'm not sure there is much to learn here, so much as there is a point to be had. It seems people are only really willing to get involved and educated when there is a contract at stake. Contracts are a major slice of the pie, but not the whole deal. There is always something going on with the union- PBS for example. The blast mail, website, and forums should have alerted people that this vote was out there. I know people have been talking about it- ops was buzzing with the talk regarding the vote. However, I think the bulk of people took an apathetic attitude towards it- if it passes, it passes........if it doesn't, it doesn't.

You are spot on though- if it is that big a deal, and the discourse is this prevelent, we need to review the ballots cast, and exclude those that are to recieve the aid. I'm still of the impression it would pass, however.

 

[sayrejm]

I have an example of why the furloughed pilots should still be able to vote IF they were off probation (which none were but since at least I voted believing I was off just bear with me)Lets say that this furlough occured at a time when those who were being furloughed were off probation and covered by the new contract. OK, lets say the same 80 pilots get furloughed and lets say that they are not allowed to vote. Now, lets say that at least one guy in the top 10 of the list wants to vote no. Now lets say a month into the furlough, ASA decides to call 10 back. Now, we have a situation where at least one of the 10 are back and having monies taken out of their pay for something that they were not allowed to vote on. That, to me, is not fair. Also in that example where we are assuming that the 80 are actually off probation, lets say the vote is happening before the effective furlough date. Are you going to tell them "your an active member in good standing with voting rights, but.... we arnt going to let you vote"?? You can't, that would be unlawful I believe. It is not a conflict of interest. If we were ligitimatly off probation (which we wernt) but if we were, it would not be a conflict of interest unless you can guarantee that if ASA recalls some that they will not have the assesment taken out of their pay because they were not allowed to vote. Now of course I would be willing to help, but jsut for arguments sake, that is why a furlough-to-be pilot should be allowed to vote. The only legal way I see around it is to have the voting after the 80 are furloughed so that they arnt active members. But, as it has been repeated many times, this isn't about conflict of interest. This is about the conversion of pilots to active membership dispite our new contract and about pilots voting thinking they were off probation.
How about this. Lets say ASA only fuloughed 50 pilots. Now we have a situation where the pilots in question like me are not going to be furloughed BUT STILL WOULD HAVE VOTED ILIGITIMATLY because they would have thought they were off probation even though they shouldnt have been. It may have gone unnoticed but it still would have been an illegal vote.

 

[maxcackel]

James, really? Just stop, PLEASE! I almost wish we could vote over just to change to a no and hope the other 79 give you a blanket party.

 

[N1VIBS]

James
We all make mistakes. When you make a mistake, offer one, repeat one, sincere apology and move on with your life. You've been apologizing and offereing reasons all over the ALPA board and now this one. Enough is enough. Let it go!!!

 

[sayrejm]

I know, I am trying to. It is hard when someone keeps saying something that isn't true or misquotes me or says something again that has already been addressed. I have just been concerned with this fire spreading around to other people by word of mouth who arn't going to be able to hear my defense on here. Because the people who spread things about me that do not know me surely arn't going to also spread my explinations to other people to let them decide for themselve, thus leaving an entire pilot group with a one sided story about what a horrible person I must be when I am not around to defend myself. That is why I dug in so hard and have been countering every punch i have been handed to limit the number of people who go from here to the cockpit with one sided stories. But you are right, I have said enough and I will do my best not to bring it up anymore. I hope I am not put in a position to defend myself anymore. Thank you to those who have understood

 

[buscap]

James!!

The best way to man up about this is to shut up about this!!!

The horse is dead and the flies are buzzing!!

Do not respond to this post!!

 

[14RF SUX]

James , you're like an annoyingly aggressive panhandler now. Just STFU.

 

[BWatz]

Funniest thing I heard all night.. Thanks for that.

 

[Speedtape]

I think we need to focus not on the error of one but the error of the way the vote was handled.

I think this issue may have to go to the Supreme Court for a ruling!

 

[Speedtape]

I totally understand what you are saying, however, I'm not sure there is much to learn here, so much as there is a point to be had. It seems people are only really willing to get involved and educated when there is a contract at stake. Contracts are a major slice of the pie, but not the whole deal. There is always something going on with the union- PBS for example. The blast mail, website, and forums should have alerted people that this vote was out there. I know people have been talking about it- ops was buzzing with the talk regarding the vote. However, I think the bulk of people took an apathetic attitude towards it- if it passes, it passes........if it doesn't, it doesn't.

You are spot on though- if it is that big a deal, and the discourse is this prevelent, we need to review the ballots cast, and exclude those that are to recieve the aid. I'm still of the impression it would pass, however.

Hmm, with all due respect, where have you been? Last I checked, the information was on all of those places you mentioned.

 

[JumpersAway]

Hmm, with all due respect, where have you been? Last I checked, the information was on all of those places you mentioned.

Hey Speedtape- reread it now that you're not tired. That's what I'm saying happened, and if people were not informed via the above methods, then there is no helping them. All this stuff should have been sufficient.

 

[Speedtape]

Hey Speedtape- reread it now that you're not tired. That's what I'm saying happened, and if people were not informed via the above methods, then there is no helping them. All this stuff should have been sufficient.

I just reread your post. The statement regarding the blast mail and forums could be read 2 different ways, especially since there was not alot of other corroborating statements supporting it. With this post, I now understand what you were saying.

When I read it, initially, it sounded as though you may have meant that the information was not out there and but that those methods "should" have communicated it, but the communication may have been void of the information.

What you were really saying was that the information was out there, but most did not engage to retrieve it.

Thanks for clearing that up

 

[79%N1]

James,

I'll vouch for your character and work ethic like you claimed many would in a post above. BUT...you need to really just fade into the backround now and STOP TYPING!!! You are going to do irreversible damage to your character if yo keep this up, and when you get back people are not going to forget.
We get it, now. You voted, and we all see the reason why. Some agree with you, some don't. Personally, I believe the ALPA rep "meant" that someone about to be furloughed, or on the list, could not vote. (Or should not) Not simply one already furloughed and out the door. It simply does not matter now. Just quite typing on this issue and people will forget.

And, for the love of god and all that is holy, PLEASE capitalize the first darn letter of a sentence and the letter I.

 

[mtsupilot376]

What are the ALPA regulations on voting discrepancies? I am not as familiar with the particulars on these matters. Do such discrepancies need to be significant enough to have affected the outcome of a vote before they merit a recount or additional referendum?
I highly agree with the previous poster that stated that this has seriously blemished ALPAs character in the eyes of this pilot group. If they brush this issue under the rug without even acknowledging the error in their ways, I would have no trouble in understanding why there was only a 20% turnout in this election.

Forced Charity is wrong. It is practically welfare.
When you start forcing people to pay for programs like this, taxing them for having a job, it is no wonder that people aren't going to give a flip about anything having to do with their union representation.

Exhibit A: 67% of U.S. voters have more confidence in their own judgment than they do in the average member of Congress.
Exhibit B: Forty-four percent (44%) voters also think a group of people selected at random from the phone book would do a better job addressing the nation’s problems than the current Congress, but 37% disagree. Twenty percent (20%) are undecided.
-both pulled from a recent Rasmussen Poll
source

If our MEC were to have an approval poll, I would be curious to see the results given the last voter turnout.

"Apathy is the glove into which evil slips it's hand"
-Bodie Thoene