Compass agreement

[~~~^~~~]

To truly understand the psychology that many mainline pilots have bought off on, pick up a book on Interest Based Bargaining, or just read about the subject on the net. Try to find the 1960's sources when the concept was first thought up (and before they put purfume on it by calling it distributive bargaining).

The nutshell reference is that IBB was management's recognition that union members were not rational and would negotiate based on prejudice, envy and the entire range of human vices. Management was perfect and wanted to negotiate only on objective numbers to maximize performance. With these concepts in place, management could put money on the table, leaving it to the union members to allocate those resources. Rather than fighting management, union members would fight each other over who got what.

Best I can tell, it works like a charm for airline management. We even carry on the fight between ourselves outside of Section 6.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

I think we have proven how well IBB works for management.

 

[FDJ2]

Along the infinitas of reasons to reject unity, ALPA's DFR excuse is probably the worst for these reasons:

• ALPA's DFR problems are the result of NOT being unified and treating pilot groups differently

Bingo. How do we treat pilots on separate seniority lists? Answer, we give them their own representational structure. Do we integrate seniority lists by having one MEC determine another pilot group should be stapled?

• It is impossible for a pilot group to have a DFR claim within itself. Just as a person can not sue himself.

Not true at all. Most successful DFR claims are from members filing lawsuits against their own bargaining unit or Local. The RJDC lawsuit failed so miserably because it had members from one bargaining unit suing a separate unit which didn't represent them. In the Compass case you have an MEC Chairman who is suppose to represent two seniority lists in a SLI. Unlike ALPA, which takes a nuetral position on SLI, you are asking the MEC to take an active role in stapling one group under another. You even admit that the Compass pilots, if left to their own, may not agree to that.

• SLI would require member ratification, including the Compass pilots

Really, where is that written?

• The Compass pilots are within a representative structure, Delta's.

That may be part of the problem.

 

[PCL_128]

FDJ2 brings up some excellent points.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Like I stated before FDJ it has issues as you have pointed out, but there are solutions to these issues.
I have tired to list a few broad ways to solve the issues you bring up, can you list some solutions as well? A little devil's advocate if you will.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Along the infinitas of reasons to reject unity, ALPA's DFR excuse is probably the worst for these reasons:

• ALPA's DFR problems are the result of NOT being unified and treating pilot groups differently

Bingo. How do we treat pilots on separate seniority lists? Best Answer, A Single List.

• It is impossible for a pilot group to have a DFR claim within itself. Just as a person can not sue himself.

Not true at all. Most successful DFR claims are from members filing lawsuits against their own bargaining unit or Local. The RJDC lawsuit failed so miserably because it had members from one bargaining unit suing a separate unit which didn't represent them. In the RJDC litigation the Plaintiff's brought their claim against ALPA. There was no direct action against the Delta MEC, or any other bargaining group. In the Compass case you have an MEC Chairman who is suppose to represent two seniority lists in a SLI. Unlike ALPA, which takes a nuetral position on SLI, you are asking the MEC to take an active role in stapling one group under another. You even admit that the Compass pilots, if left to their own, may not agree to that. So your proposed answer takes us to the exact same point the Delta MEC went when the RJDC was formed. A denial of unity, separation, and disparate treatment. When the lawsuit comes out of this round, are you going to blame me again since I pointed out the fact it is to come?

• SLI would require member ratification, including the Compass pilots

Really, where is that written? ALPA Administrative Manual and Constitution and ByLaws.

• The Compass pilots are within a representative structure, Delta's.
  

That may be part of the problem.

That is not part of the problem, it is part of the solution.

Can you tell me why our union is so dead set against unity? Really? Why always looking for reasons to divide our profession?

 

[~~~^~~~]

Like I stated before FDJ it has issues as you have pointed out, but there are solutions to these issues.
I have tired to list a few broad ways to solve the issues you bring up, can you list some solutions as well? A little devil's advocate if you will.

Second by Fins.

 

[flyboyike]

I have tired to list a few broad ways to solve the issues you bring up, can you list some solutions as well? A little devil's advocate if you will.

One broad solution would be to remember the words of Ben Franklin who said "If we don't hang together, we'll most definitely hang separately." Or something to that effect.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Exactly. Our own special interests and political agendas have gotten us to the place we are today. Management is only doing their job, we as a union need to start doing ours.

 

[Blade Runner]

That is not part of the problem, it is part of the solution.

Can you tell me why our union is so dead set against unity? Really? Why always looking for reasons to divide our profession?

In a word EGO, Your not good enough to be one of US. Or so they like to remind you. That is why you will never in your lifetime see anything remotely approaching unity within this union of egomaniacs.