From the ALPA Age 60 Website...

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Look PCL, I know Prater. Not super well, but I've been hoping he would lead the union,

There can be no leadership without followership.....

 

[Flopgut]

This isn't a dictatorship. ALPA's official, majority position is to oppose a change to the retirement age change, he's basically ignoring it. A majority of the membership will understand cabotage is a bad thing and want our elected leaders to oppose it. Will he also ignore that if there is some sort of windfall for the minority?

The more we discuss this, I'm starting to think he should be recalled!

 

[Freight Dog]

There can be no leadership without followership.....

Well said. Just as there can be no followership without leadership. Unfortunately, I think that's the case right now.

 

[airfogey]

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. Oh by the way Canadian ALPA members can fly to 65--must be the superior health care in their socialized medical system.
Finally, to all of you who want to make any change "fair" by phasing it in gradually, they sure didn't phase it in gradually 47 years ago. And BTW ALPA fought the rule tooth and nail during a time when the airlines were regulated, airlines didn't go out of business-the CAB arranged mergers with stronger carriers, pilots didn't usually get hired over 30-everybody had a 30 year career and had a stable pension--Yet ALPA fought it because it was discrimnation until the younger crewmembers outvoted the older crewmembers.

Airfogey

 

[Andy]

Andy keeps calling for Captain Prater's recall, yet he does nothing to bring it about.

These things take time. I'm not going to go rushing into a union meeting and call for Prater's recall tomorrow. Unless you're stupid, and I don't think you are, you know that such a measure would fail if not properly executed. I am not going to hastily rush into pushing for a recall; there is still time before the NPRM hits the streets.

How's that ALPA poll coming along? Will the entire membership be polled or just a select few? Will Prater actually follow the direction of the poll? And MOST importantly, does the poll discuss the stance that ALPA should take toward age 60 changes (like dump this 'pragmatic' garbage)?
I'll wait until I see the polling results and will guage my actions based on that.

And by posting my opinion on this board, an opinion shared by many others, the message DOES get back to ALPA national. We are the majority on this issue, although we have been quiet.

To throw out such a challenge to me - push for the immediate recall of Prater at a union meeting - is flamebaiting at it's worst. You know full well that there are far better intermediate measures to take. Besides, I'd like to get a few more ex-furloughees back before pushing for resolutions that would be favored by those of us who have been on the streets for the last five years.
Nice try PCl, but I'm not going to do something foolish as a result of your flamebaiting and I'm not going to be silent on this issue.
If you disapprove of open discussion on this forum, then I'd suggest that you disengage yourself from here.

 

[Andy]

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, we are in agreement on pro change information; it should be disseminated to the membership. Along with information on why to keep the status quo.
As for what other ICAO countries do, that is not something that US ALPA or the US government has control over. You are dealing with sovereignty issues. Or do you suggest that the US withdraw from ICAO?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

As for what other ICAO countries do, that is not something that US ALPA or the US government has control over. You are dealing with sovereignty issues. Or do you suggest that the US withdraw from ICAO?

Thru the Open Skies negotiations there is plenty of control...

 

[BluDevAv8r]

How's that ALPA poll coming along? Will the entire membership be polled or just a select few?

The poll has been completed. 1100 pilots were polled in a statistically random fashion by the Wilson Polling Center. However, a web survey will be made available next week for the rest of the month that is open to all ALPA pilots (including apprentice members).

Will Prater actually follow the direction of the poll?

For starters, the policy is already set - to oppose any changes to age 60 on the basis of safety. That said, Captain Prater doesn't have the ability to change policy on this issue. The only body that can change the policy is the Executive Board (all MEC Chairmen) or the Board of Directors (all local elected representatives in ALPA).

And MOST importantly, does the poll discuss the stance that ALPA should take toward age 60 changes (like dump this 'pragmatic' garbage)?

I'm not sure I understand the question. The poll is an attempt to accurate gauge member sentiment on this divisive issue in order to help the Executive Board and the rest of the ALPA leadership form a strategy for the future on this issue.

And by posting my opinion on this board, an opinion shared by many others, the message DOES get back to ALPA national. We are the majority on this issue, although we have been quiet.

Actually, it really doesn't....maybe to a few reps who read this board, but not to the majority of the elected officials. This is not a proper channel of communication by any means, especially since full names aren't used, etc.

-Neal

 

[Andy]

The poll has been completed. 1100 pilots were polled in a statistically random fashion by the Wilson Polling Center. However, a web survey will be made available next week for the rest of the month that is open to all ALPA pilots (including apprentice members).

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

For starters, the policy is already set - to oppose any changes to age 60 on the basis of safety. That said, Captain Prater doesn't have the ability to change policy on this issue. The only body that can change the policy is the Executive Board (all MEC Chairmen) or the Board of Directors (all local elected representatives in ALPA).

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'm not sure I understand the question. The poll is an attempt to accurate gauge member sentiment on this divisive issue in order to help the Executive Board and the rest of the ALPA leadership form a strategy for the future on this issue.

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

Actually, it really doesn't....maybe to a few reps who read this board, but not to the majority of the elected officials. This is not a proper channel of communication by any means, especially since full names aren't used, etc.

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.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

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.

Message boards like this may help influence other members but they are not nor is any ALPA message board a valid communications conduit for any elected rep.

 

[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