Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Breaking Colgan Alpa News

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Boiler, Joe never offers any solutions. He just whines about ALPA and sends more money to his greedy RJDC attorney.

True brand scope, rather than empty rhetoric and lip service would be a start. Not creating more alter-egos (Compass, MDA, etc.) would be another. Status quo will result in more of the same and more failed ALPA drives..... Skywest drive is next.... it will fail by even more votes than Colgan....
 
True brand scope. Probably won't happen, so expect the organization drives to fail....

It's too late for brand scope, Joe. It's impossible to even define the "brand." How many carriers now fly for Delta? I can't even remember because there are so many. Many of them aren't ALPA, and a couple aren't even unionized. How will "brand scope" fix this problem? If it was just CMR and ASA, then brand scope would be a possibility, but I'm afraid that that ship has sailed.
 
It's too late for brand scope, Joe. It's impossible to even define the "brand." How many carriers now fly for Delta? I can't even remember because there are so many. Many of them aren't ALPA, and a couple aren't even unionized. How will "brand scope" fix this problem? If it was just CMR and ASA, then brand scope would be a possibility, but I'm afraid that that ship has sailed.


Your right..... ALPA failed when they had the opportunity and now you cheerleaders are surpised when people don't vote for ALPA.... Actions or Inactions have consequences...... ALPA couldn't get the job done for the regionals and now they can't organize regional pilot groups....
 
Your right..... ALPA failed when they had the opportunity

First, it's spelled "you're." Second, why do you continue to dwell on the past? Even I as a self-professed "ALPA cheerleader" admit that ALPA made mistakes in the past in regards to scope. But dwelling on that and not being able to move on and find new solutions for the future is only counter-productive. We recognize that mistakes were made. Time to move forward and find new solutions. Right now you're just part of the problem, Joe. How 'bout becoming part of the solution?
 
First, it's spelled "you're." Second, why do you continue to dwell on the past? Even I as a self-professed "ALPA cheerleader" admit that ALPA made mistakes in the past in regards to scope. But dwelling on that and not being able to move on and find new solutions for the future is only counter-productive. We recognize that mistakes were made. Time to move forward and find new solutions. Right now you're just part of the problem, Joe. How 'bout becoming part of the solution?

First, YOU'RE right. I was typing fast. Finding spelling and grammar mistakes is easy.... debating is harder....

Second, if you don't learn from the past you are doomed to repeat it.... that is what we are doing..... Compass is an example......

I don't really care, because I really don't expect ALPA to reform itself........But I do expect other regional organization efforts to fail..... Hot dogs won't replace job security.....

If we can't fix the scope issue, then the rest is really meaningless.... we will just compete against each other.....
 
Second, if you don't learn from the past you are doomed to repeat it.... that is what we are doing..... Compass is an example......

Everyone here has already learned from those mistakes, Joe. We don't need you reminding us of them with every single post you make. And for what it's worth, the current MEC leadership at NWA opposed the NewCo (Compass) debacle. Unfortunately, they weren't the majority when the issue was decided.

If we can't fix the scope issue, then the rest is really meaningless

Agreed. So how 'bout some solutions instead of just attacking the past. You apparently agree that the "brand scope" ship has sailed, so what other ideas do you have?
 
True brand scope, rather than empty rhetoric and lip service would be a start. Not creating more alter-egos (Compass, MDA, etc.) would be another. Status quo will result in more of the same and more failed ALPA drives..... Skywest drive is next.... it will fail by even more votes than Colgan....

Golly! Sounds like a super idea! I also think it might cost a lot of money to achieve.

What are YOU willing to pay for it?

[cricket...cricket]

Since you refuse to answer that question directly, we now understand the nature of beast:

You and your RJDC wussies are unwilling to foot any of the negotiating bill to achieve Brand Scope, so you resorted to bottom-feeding lawyers to get your way.
 
We lost by four votes. We needed 155 and we only got 151. All that time standing in airports talking till we were blue in the face trying to get people on board. Well, I hope everyone enjoys the beatings that are only going to get worse. Myself and others on the OC tried, it's gonna get ugly! Enjoy the sleeping bear you all just woke up!


The "OC" what a joke. If there is any backlash from the company we have you toolbags to thank.
 
Golly! Sounds like a super idea! I also think it might cost a lot of money to achieve.

What are YOU willing to pay for it?

[cricket...cricket]

Since you refuse to answer that question directly, we now understand the nature of beast:

You and your RJDC wussies are unwilling to foot any of the negotiating bill to achieve Brand Scope, so you resorted to bottom-feeding lawyers to get your way.

1. The mainline pilots have the leverage and the capital.

2. According to ALPA the mainline pilots are the "owners" of the scope.

3. Ref. 1 & 2 above, yes it would require the mainline pilots to do the heavy lifting.

4. Because of that, it will never happen. Therefor there will be more bidding, and more fighting for the scraps. There also won't be anymore regionals joining ALPA. With Colgan, ALPA is 0 for the last 6 attempts. The Skywest vote will be 0 for 7 with regional pilot groups.
 
Everyone here has already learned from those mistakes, Joe. We don't need you reminding us of them with every single post you make. And for what it's worth, the current MEC leadership at NWA opposed the NewCo (Compass) debacle. Unfortunately, they weren't the majority when the issue was decided.

Evidently everyone hasn't learned.... that's why we now have Compass. Occam will be here shortly to tell you why Compass was a good idea.

I'm not reminding you about how badly ALPA has handled scope..... I'm reminding those who are thinking of voting ALPA onto the property. I would vote ALPA off the property if given the choice and I think those who are voting should hear BOTH sides.... fair and balanced you know...


PCL_128 said:
Agreed. So how 'bout some solutions instead of just attacking the past. You apparently agree that the "brand scope" ship has sailed, so what other ideas do you have?

If ALPA can't solve the problem of us competing against one another, then I am willing to compete against everyone else.... That's what the mainline guys are doing... they are undercutting the regionals now for the 70-90 seat flying.

I have said it before........ either stop the competition within a brand, or participate in the bidding..... I would prefer the first, but I am ready for the latter.... including bidding for larger aircraft.... what should we start the bidding at for 737 flying????
 
Evidently everyone hasn't learned.... that's why we now have Compass. Occam will be here shortly to tell you why Compass was a good idea.

I generally agree with Occam on most things, but I disagreed with him on the concessionary TA and the NewCo concession in particular. I agreed with Captain Ray Miller, then the Council 20 CA Rep, that the TA cut too deep and didn't follow the direction of the MEC and the pilot group on the issue of scope. But, in the end, the pilot group spoke with their votes and decided it was worth the lost flying.

I have said it before........ either stop the competition within a brand, or participate in the bidding..... I would prefer the first, but I am ready for the latter.... including bidding for larger aircraft.... what should we start the bidding at for 737 flying????

Translation: "I have absolutely no solutions to offer, just a bunch of b!tching. If I can't get my way, then I'll steal everyone else's flying and file lawsuits against everything that moves." :rolleyes:
 
1. The mainline pilots have the leverage and the capital.

2. According to ALPA the mainline pilots are the "owners" of the scope.

3. Ref. 1 & 2 above, yes it would require the mainline pilots to do the heavy lifting.

4. Because of that, it will never happen.

There it is!

Conclusive evidence that the RJDC geniuses refuse to accept the price of Brand Scope. They want it...but don't think they should have to pay for any part of it.

I didn't ask you who "owned" Scope...but you knew that. I also didn't ask who would pay the larger price at the table to achieve it. I asked, simply:

What are you willing to pay for it?

And I predicted you would never answer the question.

Stupid + Predictable = RJDC
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top