Duane Woerth and age 60

[ESS PWR]

I wasn't aware that the membership informed DW or ALPA on thier age 60 views? ALPA did a full educational campaign and then provided a survey for every active member to particpate in. Only 30% did. If only 30% particpate in the survey, I'd think the leadership can do whatever they want...

What am I missing?

I think from the leadership standpoint if only 30% of your members participate in a survey, then you must assume it may not be an important enough issue for the non-participant members to amend current policy and are comfortable with status quo.

 

[Falconjet]

Rez: What membership are you referring to? Members of Congress or members of the union.

The union membership was loud and clear about their opinion on age 60. The MAJORITY of the membership was in favor of keeping the Age 60 rule in place. The "survey" specifically excluded 6000 furloughed members but included Canadian pilots in an effort to rig the results in favor of change.

Still the MAJORITY of the pilots were in favor of no change. News agencies and pollsters sample 1/100 of the population and extrapolate results from those tiny sample sizes. If 30% of ALPA pilots responded (and I have never heard that figure, and I'm sure the pro change guys would have tried to capitalize on that) that is way more than the sample size of most polls.

I am very confident that the MAJORITY of ALPA members are in favor of keeping age 60 in place and the President of our union ought to beat the bushes every day pleading our case to whoever will listen, even if he is a lame duck.

FJ

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

page 3. only 38% bothered to particpate.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/DesktopMo...View.aspx?itemid=1567&ModuleId=1255&Tabid=251

If DW is going to represent this to industry or congress I don't think he will say only 38% of pilots even cared to particapte. Would you?

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Rez, do you know what a representative sample is?

As president of the union, I am shocked you do not understand what a scientifically representative sample is?

Your 38% claim must prove that you tried to rig the results and have been discourage by your lack of ability to FIX the results against what the majority clearly wants.

 

[Falconjet]

Ok, 38% it is. I still feel that it is way more of a sample size than most pollsters use when they conduct a survey. Most pollsters would kill for that kind of a response rate.

Also, I for one almost didn't reply because they excluded furloughed and probationary pilots at American carriers yet included pilots from Canadian carriers. I sent the union NUMEROUS emails complaining about this blatant effort to skew the results in favor of change. Perhaps a lot of other active pilots similarly refused to participate in what they considered a blatant attempt to rubber stamp the results.

In any case, I am a proud ALPA member and back my MEC. I have my issues with the union, and this is one of them, but I back my brothers and sisters. I was on the picket line today in support of Pinnacle (and other) carriers so don't take my concerns for a lack of support for the union and our efforts.

FJ

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

FJ-

This is an issue orientated discussion. No one is calling into to question your involvment. (BTW you FX guys looked good out there today! )

The whole age 60 issue is polarized. ALPA spent alot of time with the in Focus campaign to get members up to speed. However, if it was really a big issue why only 38%?

 

[FNG_that's me]

FJ-

This is an issue orientated discussion. No one is calling into to question your involvment. (BTW you FX guys looked good out there today! )

The whole age 60 issue is polarized. ALPA spent alot of time with the in Focus campaign to get members up to speed. However, if it was really a big issue why only 38%?

Rez,

You can do your PHD on the answer to that question. The bottom line is, the results were significant, especially when taken in the context that the method was so slanted towards favoring change. Even the polls taken here on FI and other places all say the same thing.

If you want to fix things with ALPA, be my guest. But to do that you've got to get involved at their level, not here. And you've got to be dedicated to correcting a 'wrong' not just getting them to endorse what you want them to.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Rez,

You can do your PHD on the answer to that question. The bottom line is, the results were significant, especially when taken in the context that the method was so slanted towards favoring change. Even the polls taken here on FI and other places all say the same thing.

If you want to fix things with ALPA, be my guest. But to do that you've got to get involved at their level, not here. And you've got to be dedicated to correcting a 'wrong' not just getting them to endorse what you want them to.

Agreed!

 

[Occam's Razor]

When they were appointed, both co-chairs agreed they would not issue an endorsement.

Looks like they did what they said they were going to do...

Where's the fire?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

When they were appointed, both co-chairs agreed they would not issue an endorsement.

Looks like they did what they said they were going to do...

Where's the fire?

Look's like you put it out.... instead of halon you used information, pragmatism and non emotional objectivity.... pretty effective...