ASA Mgmt and ALPA meeting

[79%N1]

Im guessing NT

 

[Tomct]

Well if they are going to wait 3 months....their performance is going to be soooo bad, DELTA will kick their ARSES!!! Remember everyone, KEEP FLYING/OPERATING SAFE!!! NO MERCY!!!! BRING THEM TOO THEIR KNEE'S!!!!

Oh and Joe...SCREW YOU...YOU MGMNT LOVIN DIRTBAG!

 

[GeekMaster]

I find this extremely hard to believe that an ALPA rep would actually say this, given their knowledge of the legal ramifications of admitting to an organized status quo violation.

Please pm me the initials of this rep so that it can be followed up on. Our reps don't need to be saying stupid things like this in public. Sometimes their rhetoric escapes better judgment.

Chances are the "alpa rep" is more like a P2P. You would be surprised at how many pilots "perceive" them as ALPA officials. But, remember, P2P's include all walks of life INCLUDING the likes of "the palm" himself.

 

[PCL_128]

I am more concerned about how ALPA is going to deal with the portfolio whipsaw.... they got a plan yet????

Do you?

 

[sweptback]

Thanks for the update, Mank.

Hey Will, I'm not Mank. Just somebody that's a P2P...

 

[WWEfan]

So I'm at the ALPA Job fair today and I hear some ALPA reps. talking about meeting with management this week. Sounds like they are meeting to finalize some language that was agreed to in the last negotiations. Why doesn't either side tell us about this? If we are meeting this week to finalize language that was agreed to, we should be informed. Sounds like some progress was made, so why the big secret? Give us this information.

So if you heard them talking"ALPA reps", why didn't you go up to them and ask what it was all about? Instead you decide to go home and complain on here?

Don't you think if there was anything that has changed the dynamics of the negotiations they would tell us?

 

[John Pennekamp]

Chances are the "alpa rep" is more like a P2P. You would be surprised at how many pilots "perceive" them as ALPA officials. But, remember, P2P's include all walks of life INCLUDING the likes of "the palm" himself.

HEY! You mess with "The Palm", you get the WHOLE HAND!

 

[Stifler's Mom]

HEY! You mess with "The Palm", you get the WHOLE HAND!

That's pretty funny.

 

[goahead]

Seriously, 50% of ALL SKYW pilots have to vote yes to pass the vote not just 50% of those that voted, this lowers the chances dramatically. Don't think it's going to happen........

 

[JoeMerchant]

Do you?

Yes I do, but ALPA cheerleaders such as yourself say it is "unworkable"..... It requires real "brand scope" or "inclusive scope" negotiated as part of mainline PWA...

In another thread, you promoted the Braniff scope language that said " all Braniff flying will be done by Braniff pilots on the Braniff seniority list"... The funny thing is, that is exactly what ASA and CMR tried to do with the PID in 2000.......... ALPA didn't support trying to bring a single list on the DAL property and we actually had leverage then..... What happened?

 

[PCL_128]

Yes I do, but ALPA cheerleaders such as yourself say it is "unworkable"..... It requires real "brand scope" or "inclusive scope" negotiated as part of mainline PWA...

We've been over this before, Joe, and you never answer the question. With 10 DCI carriers now, how do you define the brand? How would such a DAL scope clause be written? The brand scope ship has sailed. Time for new solutions.

In another thread, you promoted the Braniff scope language that said " all Braniff flying will be done by Braniff pilots on the Braniff seniority list"... The funny thing is, that is exactly what ASA and CMR tried to do with the PID in 2000.......... ALPA didn't support trying to bring a single list on the DAL property and we actually had leverage then..... What happened?

We've been over this a million times, also. A refresher: I'll say that guys supporting the PID demanded DOH, and you'll claim that's a lie. We'll go back and forth on that for two pages, and we'll get nowhere. So, how 'bout we forget about the danged PID from 7 years ago and worry about the future?

 

[JoeMerchant]

We've been over this before, Joe, and you never answer the question. With 10 DCI carriers now, how do you define the brand? How would such a DAL scope clause be written? The brand scope ship has sailed. Time for new solutions.

Well you could start with scope language at the mainline that prevents more carriers from entering the fray... You could start with mainline scope language that requires regionals to be ALPA members and limit it to current ALPA DCI members.......That won't happen because the mainline pilots don't want to use negotiating capital to make it happen... In fact, they don't even like to use negotiating capital to protect their own... You say "the brand scope ship sailed"..... many of us knew it was BS when DW uttered those words..... yet we were attacked when we said that he was full of BS.... ALPA has never been serious about true "brand scope".... at least you now realize it.... that is progress.........

We've been over this a million times, also. A refresher: I'll say that guys supporting the PID demanded DOH, and you'll claim that's a lie. We'll go back and forth on that for two pages, and we'll get nowhere. So, how 'bout we forget about the danged PID from 7 years ago and worry about the future?

The facts speak for themselves PCL.... yet as an ALPA cheerleader, you refuse to admit it.... The PID was filed in accordance with "ALPA MERGER POLICY"..... Go back and read it if you don't believe me..... There is no point in arguing it, but the facts show that it was done in accordance with "ALPA MERGER POLICY" which is not based on "DOH"....

The ship has sailed because ALPA failed..... YET AGAIN..... and I am doing what is best for me... sorry if you don't like that....

How do you see us fixing this now oh great one?.... You don't like my solutions, so what do you suggest?

 

[PCL_128]

Well you could start with scope language at the mainline that prevents more carriers from entering the fray...

That's workable, but it provides little relief. With 10 carriers already providing feed, the whipsaw is already well established.

You could start with mainline scope language that requires regionals to be ALPA members and limit it to current ALPA DCI members.......

You'll never have the leverage to get management to drop agreements with carriers it already has who are non-ALPA. A better solution is to bring the non-ALPA groups into ALPA.

You say "the brand scope ship sailed"..... many of us knew it was BS when DW uttered those words..... yet we were attacked when we said that he was full of BS.... ALPA has never been serious about true "brand scope".... at least you now realize it.... that is progress.........

DW was very serious about brand scope. He was serious about it until the very end of his terms in office. The problem was that he had no power to force it. The mainline MECs wouldn't listen to him, and President has no power to force them to. Duane favored a limited centralizing of power at National to eliminate this problem. As ALPA is set up today, there is no way for National to force mainline MECs to negotiate for certain provisions in their CBAs. It's a flaw in the system that Dave Behnke didn't foresee.

The facts speak for themselves PCL.... yet as an ALPA cheerleader, you refuse to admit it.... The PID was filed in accordance with "ALPA MERGER POLICY"..... Go back and read it if you don't believe me..... There is no point in arguing it, but the facts show that it was done in accordance with "ALPA MERGER POLICY" which is not based on "DOH"....

Correct. And the Executive Council ruled that the PID wasn't applicable under merger policy. The EC didn't feel that this was a merger as defined by the policy. Pretty simple.

How do you see us fixing this now oh great one?

I'm not sure that there is a solution. It might have gone too far. We might be permanently stuck with a system of whipsaws at the regional level. The goal until a solution is found (if ever) should be to strengthen mainline scope language and prohibit anymore outsourcing of flying. Limiting regional flying to the greatest extent possible should be the goal.

 

[JoeMerchant]

That's workable, but it provides little relief. With 10 carriers already providing feed, the whipsaw is already well established.

So ALPA failed.... thanks for validating what I already believe....

You'll never have the leverage to get management to drop agreements with carriers it already has who are non-ALPA. A better solution is to bring the non-ALPA groups into ALPA.

Depends on whether the mainline pilots want to spend the neg. capital.... everything is negotiable....depends on whether you want to pay the price.... It is clear that ALPA doesn't want to pay the price..

DW was very serious about brand scope. He was serious about it until the very end of his terms in office. The problem was that he had no power to force it. The mainline MECs wouldn't listen to him, and President has no power to force them to. Duane favored a limited centralizing of power at National to eliminate this problem. As ALPA is set up today, there is no way for National to force mainline MECs to negotiate for certain provisions in their CBAs. It's a flaw in the system that Dave Behnke didn't foresee.

Many of us were serious about ALPA not being serious.... You can blame it on the mainline MECs if you wish.... I tend to agree with you.... Doesn't alter the fact that we knew it was BS.....

Correct. And the Executive Council ruled that the PID wasn't applicable under merger policy. The EC didn't feel that this was a merger as defined by the policy. Pretty simple.

So why the BS about ASA and CMR "demanding DOH"... that NEVER happened.... yet you ALPA cheerleaders hang on to it.... IT NEVER HAPPENED and anyone who wants to look into it can see it for themselves in the actual PID filing....

Why did the EC rule that way? You yourself said that the former Braniff scope was correct.... What was wrong with having "all Delta flying done by Delta pilots".... and forming a single list? We had the leverage then and we blew it......

I'm not sure that there is a solution. It might have gone too far. We might be permanently stuck with a system of whipsaws at the regional level. The goal until a solution is found (if ever) should be to strengthen mainline scope language and prohibit anymore outsourcing of flying. Limiting regional flying to the greatest extent possible should be the goal.

I agree with you that there might not be a solution at this point, but don't ask me to support you in limiting my career now because ALPA failed..... I will support what is best for me now.... If you don't like that... TOUGH..... If ALPA can't turn back the hands of it's failures, then it needs to plan on many of it's members being unhappy and defending their own jobs..... regardless of how it affects ALPA....

 

[PCL_128]

So ALPA failed.... thanks for validating what I already believe....

Of course. ALPA has failed at various things before, and it will fail at things in the future. No organization is perfect, simply because organizations are run by imperfect people. That doesn't mean that the organization is useless or irrelevant. It simply means that you move forward and try to do better in the future. Overall, ALPA's influence on the profession has been profoundly good.

Depends on whether the mainline pilots want to spend the neg. capital.... everything is negotiable....depends on whether you want to pay the price.... It is clear that ALPA doesn't want to pay the price..

The price is simply too high. The amount of concessions that would be necessary in every other area would be draconian. This was workable when scope hadn't been loosened to such a great degree, but now it's gotten to the point where we can't afford what it costs to get it back.

So why the BS about ASA and CMR "demanding DOH"... that NEVER happened.... yet you ALPA cheerleaders hang on to it.... IT NEVER HAPPENED and anyone who wants to look into it can see it for themselves in the actual PID filing....

Correct, it is not in the actual language of the PID request. However, if the PID had been successful and the integration process started, the DCI reps would have demanded DOH. It would have ended up in arbitration and turned into a bigger mess than the current AAA/AWA debacle. It's all a moot point anyway since the list never would have been accepted by DAL management. It would have been a useless document sitting on a Herndon shelf for all eternity.

Why did the EC rule that way? You yourself said that the former Braniff scope was correct.... What was wrong with having "all Delta flying done by Delta pilots".... and forming a single list? We had the leverage then and we blew it......

Simple: in the view of the EC, it wasn't a merger as defined by the policy. DAL management had no intention of ever merging the operations, and nothing in any of the relevant CBAs required them to. It was an exercise in futility.

I agree with you that there might not be a solution at this point, but don't ask me to support you in limiting my career now because ALPA failed.

Your career isn't limited, Joe. You can get a job at a mainline carrier like everyone else does. You choose to stay at your regional carrier. If that's your choice, then fine, but don't complain when DAL pilots decide that they don't like you doing their flying.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Of course. ALPA has failed at various things before, and it will fail at things in the future. No organization is perfect, simply because organizations are run by imperfect people. That doesn't mean that the organization is useless or irrelevant. It simply means that you move forward and try to do better in the future. Overall, ALPA's influence on the profession has been profoundly good.

Never said it was "useless".... I just choose to question it.... Your right about ALPA being just like any other organization.... I encourage everyone to question every organization.... whether that be their company, their union, or their govt.... question it and it's behavior... We agree here... they made mistakes, and they will continue to make mistakes... glad we agree...

The price is simply too high. The amount of concessions that would be necessary in every other area would be draconian. This was workable when scope hadn't been loosened to such a great degree, but now it's gotten to the point where we can't afford what it costs to get it back.

What is the price of NOT FIXING IT.... is that factored into the "cost/benefit" analysis? I suspect that cost is high.....

Correct, it is not in the actual language of the PID request. However, if the PID had been successful and the integration process started, the DCI reps would have demanded DOH. It would have ended up in arbitration and turned into a bigger mess than the current AAA/AWA debacle. It's all a moot point anyway since the list never would have been accepted by DAL management. It would have been a useless document sitting on a Herndon shelf for all eternity.

That is how ALPA merger policy is written.... You always ask for the moon and settle in the middle.... right? So what if ASA/CMR asked for DOH.... It would never have been granted, even by an arbitrator..... By contrast, mainline would have asked for a pure staple.... which would have been equally injust.... but nobody wants to talk about that position.... Why should a mainline newhire push a 20 year regional pilot out of their seat???

I'm glad you agree that the PID wasn't predicated on DOH.... again progress.....

Simple: in the view of the EC, it wasn't a merger as defined by the policy. DAL management had no intention of ever merging the operations, and nothing in any of the relevant CBAs required them to. It was an exercise in futility.

So the EC had no interest in trying to return ALPA scope to "all flying to be done by pilots on the DAL seniority list".... since when has ALPA concerned itself with "what management wants"..... only in this situation has ALPA ever used managements argument.... Of course managment didn't want it.... that is when ALPA is supposed to do what is best.... but once again, it didn't....

Your career isn't limited, Joe. You can get a job at a mainline carrier like everyone else does. You choose to stay at your regional carrier. If that's your choice, then fine, but don't complain when DAL pilots decide that they don't like you doing their flying.

Oh yeah, we aren't limiting your career, just apply somewhere else and start all over again at the bottom.... No thanks PCL.... It would take me too long to get back to even... I think I will just fight to improve my current job..... even if that means fighting my own union.... Again if you our anyone else doesn't like that.... TOUGH!..... My union has a DFR responsiblity to me... whether or not you or any of the Delta pilots agree..... It will have to deal with that....

 

[PCL_128]

Never said it was "useless".... I just choose to question it.... Your right about ALPA being just like any other organization.... I encourage everyone to question every organization.... whether that be their company, their union, or their govt.... question it and it's behavior... We agree here... they made mistakes, and they will continue to make mistakes... glad we agree...

Questioning is one thing. Making them a complete enemy as you've done is another. You're absolutely obsessed with your hatred of ALPA.

What is the price of NOT FIXING IT.... is that factored into the "cost/benefit" analysis? I suspect that cost is high.....

That price has already been paid. The jobs are already lost. Any further price would only be for more lost jobs with further scope concessions. If we prevent any further loosening of scope language, then there is no cost going forward.

By contrast, mainline would have asked for a pure staple.... which would have been equally injust....

Actually, that would have been perfectly just and exactly how any merger between a mainline carrier and a regional should be done. You have zero career expectations of flying anything bigger than an RJ, so you shouldn't be integrated in a way that will put you senior to current mainline pilots. This is exactly the kind of BS that would have caused problems if the PID had been approved.

Why should a mainline newhire push a 20 year regional pilot out of their seat???

He shouldn't. Fences would prevent that. But you shouldn't bump him down the list either, since he took the risk of advancing his career by going to the bottom of a mainline list.

So the EC had no interest in trying to return ALPA scope to "all flying to be done by pilots on the DAL seniority list".... since when has ALPA concerned itself with "what management wants"..... only in this situation has ALPA ever used managements argument.... Of course managment didn't want it.... that is when ALPA is supposed to what is best.... but once again, it didn't....

The EC wasn't charged with determining what ALPA's strategy should be on scope. They were merely charged with determining whether the PID met the requirements of the policy. They determined that it did not. Again, very simple.

Oh yeah, we aren't limiting your career, just apply somewhere else and start all over again at the bottom.... No thanks PCL.... It would take me too long to get back to even..

I've never had the "pleasure" of meeting you, but from what I hear, you're a relatively young guy with plenty of career ahead of you. You're wasting your time at the regionals, Joe. The cost to your career earnings is huge. The short-term loss sucks. I'm living it right now. But the long-term gain is well worth it.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Questioning is one thing. Making them a complete enemy as you've done is another. You're absolutely obsessed with your hatred of ALPA.

I question everything the govt. does, but I don't "hate" the US.... I don't "hate" ALPA either, but it is clear they haven't been effective.... The only ones who don't see that is the ALPA cheerleaders such as yourself......

That price has already been paid. The jobs are already lost. Any further price would only be for more lost jobs with further scope concessions. If we prevent any further loosening of scope language, then there is no cost going forward.

I'm not for "loosening of scope language", but I will only support it if it "includes" me.... My job is as important as those of the mainline pilots, don't you think?

The cost going forward includes the cost of multiple carriers bidding for flying which will, and has, put pressure on "mainline" pay and workrules..... a rising tide helps all, and the opposite hurts all.... That cost hasn't been factored in.....

Actually, that would have been perfectly just and exactly how any merger between a mainline carrier and a regional should be done. You have zero career expectations of flying anything bigger than an RJ, so you shouldn't be integrated in a way that will put you senior to current mainline pilots. This is exactly the kind of BS that would have caused problems if the PID had been approved.

You didn't read what I said.... I don't have a right to be senior to a mainline pilot in his airplane, and he doesn't have a right to be senior in my airplane either..... The ultimate solution would be a "double staple".... The regional pilot goes to the bottom of any mainline aircraft list, and a mainline pilot goes to the bottom of any regional aircraft.... The problem with any "flow through" agreement is the fact that mainline pilots always want the top of the regional lists.... sorry, that isn't acceptable....

I've never had the "pleasure" of meeting you, but from what I hear, you're a relatively young guy with plenty of career ahead of you. You're wasting your time at the regionals, Joe. The cost to your career earnings is huge. The short-term loss sucks. I'm living it right now. But the long-term gain is well worth it.

That's your opinion, but I don't agree with it. You have gone from paying to fly at Gulfstream, to getting paid low rates at PCL, to once again getting paid lower than average at AirTran.... Each time giving up longevity and seniority..... I'm done chasing that at almost 40.... 5 more years and I will be able to retire if I want to.... Going to Delta, United, or NWA.... I wouldn't even get back to even for 7 or 8 more years.... That doesn't even factor in time off which is most important. I worked 6 whole days in July.... 9 days in June..... I actually have to work 13 days in Oct... but 3 of those days are only one leg....

Sorry the grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence.... I'm glad your happy at AirTran.... seems some aren't....If you are that's great.... AirTran isn't my cup of tea....

 

[PCL_128]

I question everything the govt. does, but I don't "hate" the US.... I don't "hate" ALPA either, but it is clear they haven't been effective.... The only ones who don't see that is the ALPA cheerleaders such as yourself......

Deny it if you wish, but it's clear to any casual observer that you absolutely hate ALPA.

My job is as important as those of the mainline pilots, don't you think?

Of course, but your job should be limited to flying the size and number of airplanes that you currently fly. Further outsourcing of mainline flying to you is unacceptable.

The cost going forward includes the cost of multiple carriers bidding for flying which will, and has, put pressure on "mainline" pay and workrules..... a rising tide helps all, and the opposite hurts all.... That cost hasn't been factored in.....

True, but that cost is minimal, and the cost of regaining real scope would be astronomical. It would take another century to regain what it would take to give up to achieve Braniff-era scope again.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Deny it if you wish, but it's clear to any casual observer that you absolutely hate ALPA.

It's clear to any casual observer that ALPA has failed miserably in the scope arena..... this has led to a tremendous loss of leverage.... even you admit it..... I am just pointing it out...

You also admit that my job basically belongs to ALPA and the wims of the mainline pilots wishes... if so, then I will fight ALPA at every opportunity.... If you or ALPA want to partner with me to fight for better leverage, then I will support it... if not, I will do everything I can to fight it... the choice is theirs, and/or yours..

Of course, but your job should be limited to flying the size and number of airplanes that you currently fly. Further outsourcing of mainline flying to you is unacceptable.

Says you and ALPA.... I don't agree and will do what is best for me, as will most ALPA members.... something you need to realize..... To be honest, I don't care what YOU think.... My job doesn't belong to you or to ALPA... something you need to understand....

True, but that cost is minimal, and the cost of regaining real scope would be astronomical. It would take another century to regain what it would take to give up to achieve Braniff-era scope again.

Fine, but then don't ask or expect me to support ALPA. If that is ALPA's position, then I don't support it.... and then I don't support ALPA.... Actually, you are more honest than most ALPA cheerleaders.... the battle has been lost.... We will continue to fight separately.....

I notice you decided not to address the part of my post that dealt with why I don't want to become a "real" pilot like you... very telling..... Your whole strategy is based on selling me something I don't want.....