From the ALPA Age 60 Website...

[BluDevAv8r]

That's the first that I've heard of a web survey. When does ALPA plan on telling the membership?

From the Blue Ribbon Report (which was mailed to all pilots' homes):

“The panel has developed a communications plan to
educate the members on the FAA’s NPRM process
and how ALPA is preparing to respond to it, including
a Web-based survey that will run through the​

month of April."

If you want a good resource, go to http://crewroom.alpa.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2265 which is the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel Web Page.

And to that end, you will hear a LOT more about this survey when it goes live next week. As close to 100% participation is going to be critical.

While Captain Prater doesn't have the ability to change policy, his words and actions are in direct conflict with ALPA policy. What actions have the Executive Board and the Board of Directors have taken on this matter?

I can't speak for Captain Prater but beyond some campaign material I don't recall him ever speaking out against ALPA policy on this issue. As a matter of fact, I know he hasn't. And what actions has he taken to promote the change? Again, the EB and BOD set policy on this issue.

As for the EB and BOD, the EB meets in May and will take action one way or the other at that point in time.

Does the poll account for Prater's current actions where he's assisting the FAA in implementing the change?

Captain Prater is not assisting the FAA in its change. He is, however, co-chair of the now "dead" ARC (since the sunset date has come and gone), which gave ALPA some influence in the preliminary discussions on this issue. That said, the FAA is still going to do what the FAA wants to do obviously. And the BRP is certainly not assisting the FAA in the change. The BRP's mission is to study the impact on pilot contracts, costs, pilot unity, and safety IF the change is to occur. It is a means to stay ahead of the curve here.

It's not the reps that communicate on this board; it's the membership. You know, the ones who elect the reps. This board allows the membership to share ideas which they take back to their indidual councils.
Step back and consider the people who use this board. Don't think in narrow terms of direct communication with ALPA national.

Well your first post implied direct communication with ALPA National and the leadership. Thank you for clarifying. In that case, I agree 100%. These forums are virtual crew rooms and are great ways to disseminate information (sadly misinformation too) and engage other pilots in the issues. But true participation comes in the form of events, LEC meetings, etc.

-Neal

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

, including

a Web-based survey that will run through the​

month of April."

And to that end, you will hear a LOT more about this survey when it goes live next week. As close to 100% participation is going to be critical.



. But true participation comes in the form of events, LEC meetings, etc.

Let's hope the membership participates in this poll not like the 1/3 particaption rate of the last one....

Let's hope that particaption at LEC meetings exceeds the customary 5% of the pilot group....

 

[Flopgut]

I would like to see an honest poll--ALPA would not allow any pro change info during their "discussion" two years ago prior to that poll,and I'm told that they used "statistical norming" to get the results they wanted. Lets see since that time USAIRWAYS east, Delta, and United have lost their pensions and the big elephant in the room is that since last Nov 23 pilots over 60 from airlines from all over the world have been able to fly in OUR airspace--so if ALPA wants to appease their young crewmembers and not change age 60 they better sure as hell push to not allow pilots from other countries to fly in our skies over age 60 while ours can't.

Airfogey

What really chaps me about your continuously, unchanging gripe is that my father lost a pension. A fully funded pension, about 25 years ago. You know what ALPA, the airline(s), and the gov't had to say about it? Tough sh!t! And when you read Flying the Line does it not occur to you that this business has always been like that? How come it matters more now that it's you that needs more? Why are you special? Don't act like it's [age 65] going to help everyone either. Because it does NOT help anyone in the least until after they turn 60, and it COSTS everyone else in the mean time. It will cost me less to raise a child than what this rule change will cost me in earnings.

Finally: Since we all have to simultaneously hear about how deservant you are AND how your generation of pilots is so much more capable than any other, consider this: When my father lost his airline job he went out and started at another. He did real well; More than replaced his airline money. And he showed all his kids how to do well at something other than flying. So if you're that much better than anybody/everybody why don't you get out there and find a great job? Let this profession be what it is supposed to be for everybody to take an equal turn at. Because if you're a liability at 60, you'll probably still be one at 65. And I'm not going to enjoy the sequel to this in five years unless it includes language that allows me write your wrinkly old butt off my taxes.

 

[Flopgut]

From the Blue Ribbon Report (which was mailed to all pilots' homes):

“The panel has developed a communications plan to
educate the members on the FAA’s NPRM process
and how ALPA is preparing to respond to it, including
a Web-based survey that will run through the​

month of April."

If you want a good resource, go to http://crewroom.alpa.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2265 which is the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel Web Page.

And to that end, you will hear a LOT more about this survey when it goes live next week. As close to 100% participation is going to be critical.



I can't speak for Captain Prater but beyond some campaign material I don't recall him ever speaking out against ALPA policy on this issue. As a matter of fact, I know he hasn't. And what actions has he taken to promote the change? Again, the EB and BOD set policy on this issue.

As for the EB and BOD, the EB meets in May and will take action one way or the other at that point in time.



Captain Prater is not assisting the FAA in its change. He is, however, co-chair of the now "dead" ARC (since the sunset date has come and gone), which gave ALPA some influence in the preliminary discussions on this issue. That said, the FAA is still going to do what the FAA wants to do obviously. And the BRP is certainly not assisting the FAA in the change. The BRP's mission is to study the impact on pilot contracts, costs, pilot unity, and safety IF the change is to occur. It is a means to stay ahead of the curve here.



Well your first post implied direct communication with ALPA National and the leadership. Thank you for clarifying. In that case, I agree 100%. These forums are virtual crew rooms and are great ways to disseminate information (sadly misinformation too) and engage other pilots in the issues. But true participation comes in the form of events, LEC meetings, etc.

-Neal

So EB and BOD really has been the ones to sanction the "pragmatic approach" [dialog and assistance] to the NPRM instead of fully resisting the change more like APA? What I'm saying is: ALPA should be totally out of this and refuse to give input for change IMHO. Who's idea was it to have this dialog?

I am working on the talking points for you on the retirement idea. But what I'm afraid will be the case is: post retirement age change, we won't be able to get any sort of improvement considered. From a CB standpoint and a oversight standpoint, we aren't going to be able to get consideration on anything because everyone will be able to say "you pilots don't need anything else, you all get to work to 65 now", problem solved. And we aren't going to be able to downplay the change because ALPA will have been a intergral part of the change process. We aren't covering our 6 on this from a CBA standpoint and the top half of ALPA doen't care because it's money in their pocket. ALPA isn't supposed to be playing along with this and I haven't read anything that suggest you're working to preclude the detriments to collective bargaining we will face.

 

[BluDevAv8r]

So EB and BOD really has been the ones to sanction the "pragmatic approach" [dialog and assistance] to the NPRM instead of fully resisting the change more like APA? What I'm saying is: ALPA should be totally out of this and refuse to give input for change IMHO. Who's idea was it to have this dialog?

Captain Prater set up the BRP on his own to study the effects of the possible change to the retirement age. He doesn't need EB/BOD approval to set up ad hoc committees such as this one. The BRP has nothing to do with the policy choice of whether or not ALPA should or shouldn't support Age 60. As for his or ALPA's policy versus APA's reaction to the NPRM, that isn't a question I can answer as I'm just a worker bee in this one. You'd have to direct that one to Captain Prater himself even though I'm sure I could guess what his response would be.

I am working on the talking points for you on the retirement idea. But what I'm afraid will be the case is: post retirement age change, we won't be able to get any sort of improvement considered. From a CB standpoint and a oversight standpoint, we aren't going to be able to get consideration on anything because everyone will be able to say "you pilots don't need anything else, you all get to work to 65 now", problem solved. And we aren't going to be able to downplay the change because ALPA will have been a intergral part of the change process.

ALPA's involvement or lack of, is a classic "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation. Some pilots will be upset if we aren't involved saying we were reactionary and others will be upset that we are involved saying that we should be hands off. You won't be able to please 66,000 pilots.

We aren't covering our 6 on this from a CBA standpoint and the top half of ALPA doen't care because it's money in their pocket. ALPA isn't supposed to be playing along with this and I haven't read anything that suggest you're working to preclude the detriments to collective bargaining we will face.

Actually, the work that the BRP is doing with R&I, E&FA, and Representation is exactly what you are suggesting...."covering our 6 on the CBA issues."

-Neal

 

[Purpledog]

Just went to ALPA's crewroom and couldn't find anything about an online poll. If it's there it's hidden pretty well. It must only be available to over 50, non-furloughed, non-apprentice members.

 

[Flopgut]

Captain Prater set up the BRP on his own to study the effects of the possible change to the retirement age. He doesn't need EB/BOD approval to set up ad hoc committees such as this one. The BRP has nothing to do with the policy choice of whether or not ALPA should or shouldn't support Age 60. As for his or ALPA's policy versus APA's reaction to the NPRM, that isn't a question I can answer as I'm just a worker bee in this one. You'd have to direct that one to Captain Prater himself even though I'm sure I could guess what his response would be.



ALPA's involvement or lack of, is a classic "danged if you do and danged if you don't" situation. Some pilots will be upset if we aren't involved saying we were reactionary and others will be upset that we are involved saying that we should be hands off. You won't be able to please 66,000 pilots.



Actually, the work that the BRP is doing with R&I, E&FA, and Representation is exactly what you are suggesting...."covering our 6 on the CBA issues."

-Neal

I don't know Neal. I don't think you're "covering our 6" too well. You're just reacting, they are in the driver's seat. There is a complete lack of organic, forward thinking out of ALPA. It's the same broken record in that regard. It should not be hard for a sophisticated and well funded union like ALPA to make a political play. But, as always, we're going to end up making the FA union look smart?!

The fact that Captain Prater answers an NPRM with a BRP, instead of simply doing what the APA did and then withdrawing input, when it was abundantly clear what the membership's MAJORITY wanted, goes against every reason unions exist. The BRP will enable oversight to say we had input, and therefore we agree to it, even though that's NOT what our union should be doing. What if this were a different issue, like foreign control? He has just shown them how to get anything past us! Put a few dollars in front of the more senior types who happen to be running the show and they'll get whatever they want!

This is a huge issue Neal. This gets botched and we will all end up with less than half of what we ever hoped for out of this. The only way to fix it will be with new representation.

I think there might be a disconnect of responsibility on Captain Prater's part. I like the guy, so it's been hard for me to recognize.

 

[Andy]

Just went to ALPA's crewroom and couldn't find anything about an online poll. If it's there it's hidden pretty well. It must only be available to over 50, non-furloughed, non-apprentice members.

It's buried in the right hand column of page 7 of the report. Nice. Open the .pdf and do a search for web-based.

 

[Huggyu2]

OK, I don't know the intricacies of this issue like y'all do. Let me ask you this: what would it take to get overwhelming support from those folks that don't support it? What give-and-take issue would you want? What can the airlines, or the gov't, give to make it a fair deal for the pilot community?

 

[Andy]

From the Blue Ribbon Report (which was mailed to all pilots' homes):

“The panel has developed a communications plan to
educate the members on the FAA’s NPRM process
and how ALPA is preparing to respond to it, including
a Web-based survey that will run through the​

month of April."

If you want a good resource, go to http://crewroom.alpa.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2265 which is the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel Web Page.

And to that end, you will hear a LOT more about this survey when it goes live next week. As close to 100% participation is going to be critical.

I previously skimmed the Report. Your reference is buried on page 7.

I can't speak for Captain Prater but beyond some campaign material I don't recall him ever speaking out against ALPA policy on this issue. As a matter of fact, I know he hasn't. And what actions has he taken to promote the change? Again, the EB and BOD set policy on this issue.

As for the EB and BOD, the EB meets in May and will take action one way or the other at that point in time.

Prater is pulling a Petain/Vichy government - collaborating with the enemy. He has publicly stated that he is in favor of a change to age 60 both in print and on video. He has agreed to work with the FAA on implementation of this change. Meanwhile the EB and BOD sit back and allow this to happen.
Follow this link: https://crewroom.alpa.org/DesktopMo...View.aspx?itemid=6613&ModuleId=1068&TabId=202
Click on the video. Go to 3:27 into the video. Listen to what Prater says about his conversation with a couple of United pilots. He IS speaking out in opposition to the age 60 rule.

His stance reminds me of Clayton Williams' attitude toward rape (ran for TX governor against Kay Bailey Hutchison). "Speaking of the weather, he said it was like rape: There's nothing to do but sit back and enjoy it."

Captain Prater is not assisting the FAA in its change. He is, however, co-chair of the now "dead" ARC (since the sunset date has come and gone), which gave ALPA some influence in the preliminary discussions on this issue. That said, the FAA is still going to do what the FAA wants to do obviously. And the BRP is certainly not assisting the FAA in the change. The BRP's mission is to study the impact on pilot contracts, costs, pilot unity, and safety IF the change is to occur. It is a means to stay ahead of the curve here.

Again, Prater has clearly stated that he wants to work with the FAA on this. This is a completely different course of action than what APA has chosen.

Well your first post implied direct communication with ALPA National and the leadership. Thank you for clarifying. In that case, I agree 100%. These forums are virtual crew rooms and are great ways to disseminate information (sadly misinformation too) and engage other pilots in the issues. But true participation comes in the form of events, LEC meetings, etc.

Poorly written on my part; I do not see this forum as a method to communicate with national. I see this forum as a method to stir up grass roots support.

I realize that you're taking incoming here on behalf of a forked up ALPA national; thanks for posting.