Censored from the ALPA web boards

[jke406]

It's great to see that ALPA is encouraging a free flow of ideas on its message board.

Nothing like a little censorship to let the members know their views are important.

I'm sure Rez O. Lenin will be able to justify the censorship of contributing members, though.

 

[Lear70]

Formerly on the ALPA web board, but deleted by ALPA:


Did you know that Date of Hire seniority integration is now mandated by the law President Bush signed in December of 2007 when two airlines with different unions merge??? Don’t you think that is critical information considering that Parker has stated another merger is likely and he recently secured a golden parachute clause for key management? Here are details; pass this along to everyone who might be interested:
------------------------------

Ummm... Have you actually *READ* Allegheny-Mohawk?

In its ENTIRETY?

You really need to, especially since it's now law.

Allegheny-Mohawk does NOT automatically equal Date of Hire. Period. The end.

The whole POINT of Allegheny-Mohawk is that no carrier can automatically staple an entire pilot group under another based on ANY single or combined basis (including DOH), if it would result in economic hardship to the pilots at one or the other carrier.

Specifically, it requires the carriers to integrate in a "fair and equitable manner" and, if the pilots involved take a significant pay cut for an extended amount of time (get bumped out of equipment or seat), the carrier has to actually make them whole in terms of income by a formula contained in the ruling.

Allegheny-Mohawk is complicated, and does NOT automatically equal DOH. In fact, one could argue that, because the financial fallout from a windfall to one group is placed BACK on the carrier, the carrier will likely figure out a slotted or fenced integration arrangement to save them MILLIONS in extra payroll costs from Allegheny-Mohawk protections.

You *might* get DOH, just saying it's not a foregone conclusion and, if you get displaced, you get pay protected.

No guarantees on lost upgrade expectations of course, but seceding from ALPA won't help you either. I'm not a big ALPA cheerleader, but since ALL airlines are going to get Allegheny-Mohawk protections, regardless of union involvement, it makes a poor reason to secede from ALPA.

There's other good arguments out there both FOR and AGAINST ALPA; pick a better bandwagon.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

AGAINST ALPA; pick a better bandwagon.

TRUST. ALPA cannot be trusted. ALPA operates in secret concerning all its policies. ALPA has no transparency. And when major issues are decided the memberships needs are not met.

The lack of trust, truth, and honesty is the bandwagon.

And this threads discussion of the new legislation is another prime example of TWA ALPA lying to it members and doing the wrong thing thereby creating new legislation to protect the worker from ALPA and other unethical unions.

 

[PCL_128]

You *might* get DOH, just saying it's not a foregone conclusion and, if you get displaced, you get pay protected.

The chance of actually getting DOH under the LPPs is virtually non-existent. ALPA probably removed the post that started this article because it is filled with lies and misinformation in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way out of ignorance. As usual, USAPA and their supporters should be ashamed.

 

[tomgoodman]

Respond, don't censor

ALPA probably removed the post that started this article because it is filled with lies and misinformation in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way out of ignorance.

That may have been ALPA's motive, but they would have better served their membership by posting a well-reasoned refutation instead of deleting the post. That way, others who might share a good-faith misconception would be educated instead of provoked. Silencing debate does not promote unity.

 

[PCL_128]

That may have been ALPA's motive, but they would have better served their membership by posting a well-reasoned refutation instead of deleting the post. That way, others who might share a good-faith misconception would be educated instead of provoked. Silencing debate does not promote unity.

I agree. Unfortunately, many MECs have a strict policy about not allowing the union leadership to post on their message boards, so that might have been an issue with posting a rebuttal. I've always been against said policies, but I seem to be in the minority.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

TRUST. ALPA cannot be trusted. ALPA operates in secret concerning all its policies. ALPA has no transparency. And when major issues are decided the memberships needs are not met.

What are you going to do about it?

The lack of trust, truth, and honesty is the bandwagon.

Funny... ALPA members keep not voting in these untrustworthy leaders. How many times does one have to do the same thing over and over while still yielding an undesirable result before they make a change?

What do you call someone who keeps banging thier head against the wall?

And this threads discussion of the new legislation is another prime example of TWA ALPA lying to it members and doing the wrong thing thereby creating new legislation to protect the worker from ALPA and other unethical unions.

Silly democracy....

 

[Lear70]

That may have been ALPA's motive, but they would have better served their membership by posting a well-reasoned refutation instead of deleting the post. That way, others who might share a good-faith misconception would be educated instead of provoked. Silencing debate does not promote unity.

That's absolutely correct, and has always been a problem ALPA (and other unions I've been associated with) have had.

Silence only FUELS the "black helicopter" conspiracy theorists... it doesn't help solve the problem and, consistently, the loudest voices always get the attention of those who don't go to the source to find out things for themselves.

Then, the next thing you know, every line pilot has heard the rumors, chalked it down as "fact", and you have a much harder time getting the truth out there.

Dealing with the problem head-on, calmly, dispassionately, and factually, will solve most problems. Too bad most union leaders don't seem to understand this basic premise.

 

[jke406]

ALPA probably removed the post that started this article because it is filled with lies and misinformation in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way out of ignorance.

How can you possibly defend this action? This further erodes your already piss-poor credibility.

You sound like Big Brother from Orwell's "1984." Have you read it? Could have been based on the ALPA apologists on this forum, especially you, UALdriver, and Rez O. Lenin.

Pathetic. I want my money back.

 

[PCL_128]

How can you possibly defend this action? This further erodes your already piss-poor credibility.

Did you read further down, or were you too busy frothing at the mouth with hatred for the Association? I already posted that I agree with Tom's opinion (and Lear's, for that matter) that this sort of action ultimately backfires. But the original post that was removed was categorically untrue. The proper way to handle it would have been a formal response from the Association. As I said earlier, however, most MECs have a strict policy against ALPA leaders posting on ALPA message boards. Many MECs actually deactivate the write access of elected Officers so they don't even have the capability to respond. I've always disagreed with this policy, and I made sure it didn't happen at Pinnacle with our union boards.