Jetblue pilots begin organization drive...

[ExpWayVis31]

I paid over $2000 in union dues in 2006, money well spent. So in addition to a COLA increase they also need an extra 1-2% raise to cover dues.

 

[Caveman]

SWAPA's relationship with SWA is because of SWA management. They have decided to make unions there partners. ALPA is ready to be a partner with all managements. But management runs the show. It is thier airline and they have operational control. Thus, is ALPA "adversarial" becuase it is in thier nature or becuase they are tired of giving concessions only to see the Corp Elite give themselves bonuses with the givebacks they just handed over. Leadership starts at the top by those who have control of the company. Can you really hold any union accountable for setting the tone? That would be like saying the FO is responsible for setting the tone in the cockpit.

oh, so you want jet technology when it comes to representation and not baby steps in a Dayton bicycle shop.....

Yes, the union is partly responsible for the tone of the relationship between pilots and management. I'm not new to ALPA and my experience has been that ALPA can be overly adversarial at times. I'm not giving management a pass, but ALPA doesn't always promote open communication either. Their hands are just as dirty as management's. SWAPA does a better job of that IMO. That's why I'd like to see our representation modeled after them. I'll take ALPA, but they are my second choice. I want no part of IBT.

You asked me why I preferred an independent union. I told you. Now, you want to argue with my reasons. I get it. You bleed ALPA red, white and blue. I and others that have some ALPA experience do not. They are not the be all end all of airline unions. They're just the biggest. I'd rather have our own union but I'm willing to tolerate ALPA. FWIW, the fact that Woerthless is gone is a big plus for ALPA. If he were still there I'd be much less inclined to have ALPA on property.

I have no idea what your last sentence is trying to convey. Humor?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Yes, humor on the last part. My apologies if it is weak.

Caveman, understand that national and international forces, including globalization are going to effect every airline pilot in the US.

Sure it takes two in any relationship. And sure ALPA is to blame. But you want to say that the people at ALPA are more to blame than in house people. Or company people? People are people are people. Same in the Marines. And this is your main reason for wanting an in house: you think ALPA is too advisarial. Respectfully, I think this is too presumptious. I can see the logic in having an in house union means more control of the union culture and mentality, but the loss in national and international affairs would be far to great and in my opinion create an ineffectual in house.

In order to protect this profession all of us are going to have to Band together. creating in house unions is a temporary fix and is based on old school thinking. It works for the pre-regulation, non globalized economy.

ALPA? I am willing to trade the name of ALPA for a new union if it meant bringing all pilots under one union. No doubt there is some concern with one union. But the benifits outweight that 10 to one.

Why isn't the APA back? It has been over fifty years. The only reason now is an emotional attachment to idendity.

DW has done plenty to defend this profession. The problem is you don't know it. So you think he has done a crappy job. Again that is his fault and your fault.

Here is a question. Do you believe the issues of globalization, multi-crew licenseing, open skies, foriegn control and ownership are real and if so do you think an in house union can protect your job from that? If they can't then what is the point?

 

[Caveman]

Yes, humor on the last part. My apologies if it is weak.

Caveman, understand that national and international forces, including globalization are going to effect every airline pilot in the US.

Sure it takes two in any relationship. And sure ALPA is to blame. But you want to say that the people at ALPA are more to blame than in house people. Or company people? People are people are people. Same in the Marines.

In order to protect this profession all of us are going to have to Band together. creating in house unions is a temporary fix and is based on onld school thinking. It works for the pre-regulation, non globalized economy.

ALPA? I am willing to trade the name of ALPA for a new union if it meant bringing all pilots under one union. No doubt there is some concern with one union. But the benifits outweight that 10 to one.

Why isn't the APA back? It has been over fifty years. The only reason now is an emotional attacment to idendity.

DW has done plenty to defend this profession. The problem is you don't know it. So you think he has done a crappy job. Again that is his fault and your fault.

Here is a question. Do you believe the isses of globalization, multi-crew licenseing, open skies, foriegn control and ownership are real and if so do you think an in house union can protect your job from that?

ALPA has serious conflict of interest issues between member airlines and has repeatedly chosen to protect some interests to the detriment of others. Woerthless was at the helm while this developed and IMO exacerbated the division amongst similiarly branded groups. Frankly, it's a cluster******************** and he should have been run out of there years ago. Whatever defending of the profession he did was greatly offset by the damage he did.

While you are concerned about globalization, etc, etc, the ALPA house is on fire. Fix the internal problems and then we can talk about the big picture. You're worrying about elephants and you're standing on an ant hill.

Despite all of that I still think ALPA is better than nothing and certainly better than the IBT. I believe an in-house union that is solely concerned about only one pilot group is the best way to go. I'll settle for ALPA if that's the way things play out.

 

[Ty Webb]

Caveman-

Why do you think that ALPA is better than IBT? What other choices are out there other than those two, or being an independent?

 

[PCL_128]

An in-house union would be completely ineffectual at an airline the size of JetBlue. You need a truly huge pilot group (think AA and SWA) with very large salaries to bring in enough money to provide the resources that an in-house union would need to provide even a fraction of the representation that ALPA can provide. Remember, even APA and SWAPA have to pay ALPA for services that they can't provide with their limited resources.

 

[HA25]

Well it certainly is no secret over on the Jetblue pilots message board, so I thought I would post it here. After today's cornholing of the pilots, the union drive is now in full swing.

First meeting with the ALPA recruiter's is in early 2007, with two more meetings scheduled later. Hopefully, a vote by summer and a union of some sort on the property by the end of the year.

There has been a rising voice for a union for the last couple of years, but after today, if you could say anything good at all, it's that this pilot group is finally, mostly unified on this matter.

I look forward to you boys becoming brothers in ALPA, and helping the rest of the industry raise the bar.. It's about time!

Merry Christmas, and may it be the last one without a contract for you!

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

ALPA has serious conflict of interest issues between member airlines and has repeatedly chosen to protect some interests to the detriment of others. Woerthless was at the helm while this developed and IMO exacerbated the division amongst similiarly branded groups. Frankly, it's a cluster******************** and he should have been run out of there years ago. Whatever defending of the profession he did was greatly offset by the damage he did.

But yet he wasn't run out of there. So why is your opinion not aligned with factual events? Are you right and the ALPA BOD wrong? You might say perhaps that he was run out of here at the recent election. True, in part, but if you knew about the dirty politics of the UAL and CAL MEC it wasn't based on DW's OJP (on the job performance).

And intresting series of events has occured. DW was more connected to CapHill than any other ALPA Prez. Just when control of Congress switch over, ALPA kicks out their connected point man. For the next year, in Congressional Offices one will hear... "Who the hell is Prater? What happened to Woerth?"

While you are concerned about globalization, etc, etc, the ALPA house is on fire. Fix the internal problems and then we can talk about the big picture. You're worrying about elephants and you're standing on an ant hill.

What internal problems? Speak to the issue not rhtoeric.

It seems you have problems at Jb. NWA has problems, so does UAL, so does the Bush Admin. So did the Clinton Admin. So does my church. So does my family. So does the Marines.

Any organization that has people is going to have problems. As members of these organizations we can step up like PROFESSIONALS and work together to solve them or we can pretend that we are "above" the problems and say our member organizations are flawed and call for a new organization.... which will be made up of ...people again...

IOW caveman, you can pretend that you are removed from the problems, you can pretend that the problems doesn't exist or you can pretend that you can make problems go way by creating new organizations...

Some think people equals problem. While others think people equals opportunity. Which are you?

Despite all of that I still think ALPA is better than nothing and certainly better than the IBT. I believe an in-house union that is solely concerned about only one pilot group is the best way to go. I'll settle for ALPA if that's the way things play out.

And what if you belonged to ALPA and were only concerned for one pilot group? And that group was any and all Air Line Pilots.

See, if your in house was only concerned with its own then you will not and cannot survive. In the global economy of the New Air Line Industry you cannot pretend that the jb route structure is the airline industry. Your managment doesn't think that way and if your pilot group does, you will get hammered. Why? Because any airline management, including jb, is cost conscience. And jb, like any management must consider the global comepetitveness of cost. Including labor.

If the the legacy carriers are forced to use foreign labor to fly thier airplanes and US Pilots are forced out you can bet SWA and JB will be forced to consider such a move. How can they not. What that will mean is, ALPA failed to keep foreign labor out of the cockpits of US aircraft and it is only a matter of (very short) time before it happens at jB, SWA, Airtran and AMR. Your in house union will be about as effective as the French army.

Why do I say ALPA has failed? Becuase ALPA is the only pilot organization trying to stop foreign ownership and control.

 

[Lake Alice]

An in-house union would be completely ineffectual at an airline the size of JetBlue. You need a truly huge pilot group (think AA and SWA) with very large salaries to bring in enough money to provide the resources that an in-house union would need to provide even a fraction of the representation that ALPA can provide. Remember, even APA and SWAPA have to pay ALPA for services that they can't provide with their limited resources.

Wrong as usual.

 

[Caveman]

Rez,

You dig Duane, I do not. You are hardcore ALPA, I am not. Let's leave it at that.

TY,

I'd prefer my union to be solely concerned about my airline and nothing else. If that isn't available, I'd prefer my union to be concerned only about my airline and airlines in general. If that isn't possible I guess I'd be able to work with a union that deals with airlines and other labor groups too. It's a matter of priorities. The more competing interests are involved the less priority my particular labor group will get. That's why I prefer independent, ALPA, and the IBT in that order.

PCL,

I don't think we would be completely ineffectual. We could also choose to pay for ala carte services from ALPA.