National Seniority Protocol

[JoeMerchant]

I'm a hell of a lot more militant than the average ALPA rep. Hell, I'm a hell of a lot more militant than Rez.

Yet you accused my neg. committee of "asking for too much" in '98"....That would make me more militant.....Hmmmm..........

I suspect that ALPA will go above and beyond to make this system fair, if it ever gets off the floor at all. I suspect people like me will be the ones pissed off, not you, Joey.

See the above post by DoinTme.....I should have known better....This will be stacked in the favor of the mainline pilots.....Too much at risk to support it...even if it is a good idea in theory....

 

[GeekMaster]

To say that "regional" pilots will have 5 out of the 11 committee spots is being generous. The resolution has the MEC chairmen of each "B" and "C" group carriers choose their representative to the committee. Currently, "regional" carriers do not have the majority in groups B2 or B4.

What the canadian "C" group has to do with this I don't know as I don't think you could include them in the American National seniority list due to the inability of some and complexity of working across the border.

I think when it boiled down to the committee appointments you would only have 2-3 out of 11 that are representing the interests of the RJ drivers and our unique type of carriers.

All the more reason we are in a position to get sodomized. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Way2Broke]

We can go ahead and re-regulate airlines while we are at it.

Want to see it all get better again? Gov't regulated airlines and a national seniority list are the answers.

 

[GeekMaster]

I just thought of something.....all you ALPA insiders out there..... is ASA's TZ head of one of those B groups? I'm not sure exactly what his position is but I thought it was somewhere along that lines. Isn't he the one that "moved" for the failed resolution to tax 401K contributions?

Just questions...no accusations.

 

[PCL_128]

Too much at risk to support it...even if it is a good idea in theory....

You're going to stop supporting a good idea just because you think the mainline guys might try to screw you? Do you even listen to yourself? This is ridiculous. It's a good idea. You should support the idea until you find out that they're actually doing something to screw you. Preemptive anger is absurd.

 

[GeekMaster]

You're going to stop supporting a good idea just because you think the mainline guys might try to screw you? Do you even listen to yourself? This is ridiculous. It's a good idea. You should support the idea until you find out that they're actually doing something to screw you. Preemptive anger is absurd.

I don't think Joe is basing it on "MIGHT". The language is already there in the resolution; referencing career "benchmarks" when developing the seniority formula and minimal representation on the appointed committee.

 

[JoeMerchant]

You're going to stop supporting a good idea just because you think the mainline guys might try to screw you? Do you even listen to yourself? This is ridiculous. It's a good idea. You should support the idea until you find out that they're actually doing something to screw you. Preemptive anger is absurd.

Yes because the risk is too high....It's smart to do a risk/reward analysis.....The risk is too high given the prevailing wisdom...which you agree with....

We couldn't get the Delta MEC to go for a single list on the DAL property back in 2000.....Fins is right....Why not do it on a "brand" basis first? Even then there is the prevailing attitude that a mainline newhire is higher up the food chain than a 25 year regional "lifer"......

You and I have argued about this for years....Your attitude is the prevailing attitude....Mine is the minority...Sorry I don't trust anyone in this "association" to do what is best for me....

It was short lived....but I have withdrawn my support....This "association" is doomed....

 

[JoeMerchant]

I don't think Joe is basing it on "MIGHT". The language is already there in the resolution; referencing career "benchmarks" when developing the seniority formula and minimal representation on the appointed committee.

You are correct GeekMaster...In my excitement that ALPA might actually start acting more like a real union, I initially supported this proposal....However as I read it more closely and listened to others, I have come to the belief that there is too much down side....

 

[DoinTime]

I just thought of something.....all you ALPA insiders out there..... is ASA's TZ head of one of those B groups? I'm not sure exactly what his position is but I thought it was somewhere along that lines. Isn't he the one that "moved" for the failed resolution to tax 401K contributions?

Just questions...no accusations.

I would never call myself an insider but according to the back page of Air Line Pilot, Tom is the Executive Council representative for the B2 group.

You're going to stop supporting a good idea just because you think the mainline guys might try to screw you? Do you even listen to yourself? This is ridiculous. It's a good idea. You should support the idea until you find out that they're actually doing something to screw you. Preemptive anger is absurd.

This is a good idea in principle. The devil is always in the details though. Hopefully, this can worked out to something reasonable for everyone. Reasonable is quiet a ways off from this resolution as written though.

 

[JoeMerchant]

This is a good idea in principle. The devil is always in the details though. Hopefully, this can worked out to something reasonable for everyone. Reasonable is quiet a ways off from this resolution as written though.

Who'd a ever thunk I would agree with DoinTime.....The "benchmarks" and seniority method have to be spelled out in advance for me to support it.....Take care of that and I will put my ALPA pom-poms back on.....

Sorry but "I'll still love you in the morning" isn't going to cut it........