Negotiations & The Cost of "Heck No!"

[Treme]

Since most of us -- regardless of which company we fly for -- are being faced (yet again) with airline management slithering back to the pilot groups begging for concessions I thought it would merit some discussion regarding the repercussions of saying, "Heck No!"

Everyone knows that so-called "regional" airline pilots, especially first officers, can ill-afford to offer any concessions in compensation or quality of life. But, unfortunately, management has asked and it is up to the MECs at our respective companies to listen to their proposals and respond in what they perceive to be the best interests of the pilot group.

So the question I would like to pose is:

What do you believe management will do if your MEC tells them, "Thanks but no thanks -- we'll see you when this contract expires."?

I think we can all agree that they won't simply pack up and say, "Well gosh guys. Thanks for your time. Hope you understand we had to ask." and then go back to headquarters and sulk.

My personal opinion is that they will go back to HQ, open up Airline Management For Dummies, and turn to the chapter entitled, "Hostages, Reductions, and Other Pressure Tactics".

At US Airways one of the more vocal Captains labled these tactics "FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt".

What he meant was that management would enact a series of events which was meant to divide the pilot group and create an atmosphere of fear. It was designed to cause the group to become uncertain of the stability of their company and, more importantly their jobs, and to cause them to doubt their pilot leadership.

The simplest way for them to so is to furlough pilots. This has a far reachest effect on any pilot seniority list since it impact the vast majority of any pilot group as it has the net effect of dragging seniority downward.

I/E: Junior pilots (obviously) lose their jobs. Blockholders become reserves. Captains downgrade to F/Os. etc...

Most of our contracts are somewhat limited in language that would protect us from the transfer of flying, return of leased aircraft etc.

For example, what if (during negotiations) management decided to return all of your company's Saab's to the lessor. Obviously there might now be a glut of pilots -- but no way to force the company to acquire new airplanes. Since all of us are part of a "portfolio" of carriers now, it seems likely that one of the other affiliate carriers would pick up the slack. We see it nearly everywhere in the industry right now.

• At US Airways Express Piedmont and Allegheny are being slowly disolved while PSA, Chautauqua, and especially Mesa grow exponentially.
• At American Eagle management tried to transfer aircraft to Chautauqua and Trans-States.
• At ASA the Brasilias are being parked and Chautauqua is picking up additional flying in Dallas and Orlando.
• At Northwest Airlink Mesaba was recently "left out" of a regional-jet order that was placed for Pinacle.
• Air Wisconsin is being threatened with the termination of their code-share if they do not agree to concessions. Chautauqua, according to this message board, stands ready to order EMB170s to replace them.

You get the idea.

So anyhow -- back to the question at hand.

If/When management comes to you and asks for concessions and you say, Not only NO but HECK no! what do you believe their response will be?

1. How will their response impact you and your career?

2. How will it impact the junior pilots on their seniority list?

3. How will their response impact the unity of your pilot group and therefore your stregnth and resolve as a group? (if junior pilots suddenly face furlough)

4. What will your MEC do to foster unity throughout the pilot group?

5. What will your MEC do to prevent, minimize, or mitigate potential furloughs?

6. Does your MEC have a plan that goes beyond "Heck No" and are they prepared to deal with the reality that management will take hostages? Do they have a plan?

7. or am I full of it... will management quietly go home and not come back until the contract is up?

Hopefully this topic will start a discussion on how to defend our profession and keep what we have during what I believe will be the most aggressive attack on our contracts in a decade.

 

[Caveman]

They are counting on all that fear you are talking about to help them achieve their goals. Comair pilots faced the dragon square in the eye and are right now enjoying the best PWA and compensation of any pilots flying RJs. Let them talk. We'll listen and then make the best decision that's in OUR interests. If the economic facts show that some bargaining is in order, then that's what we'll probably do. If on the other hand they simply just want a better deal to fatten the bottom line, well, too bad. Let the games begin. Furloughs, smurloughs. Been there, done that.

 

[Treme]

Thanks!

Interesting comments Caveman.

I see by your profile information that you're a CL65 Captain.

Are you a blockholder who might be faced with going back on reserve?

or a junior Captain who might be downgraded to F/O?

or will you feel no impact whatsoever by potential furloughs?

Your position on the seniority list may largely insulate you from potential job-loss, but some junior pilots (for example those who were hired by Comair after being furloughed by American Eagle) might be less likely to fall on the sword without at least considering a management request.

Since each pilot faces a different potential loss, I believe we can see how unity might be in jeopardy. I am curious how your MEC intends to combat that possibility?

 

[efiscompmon]

I think that there is more to it than that. CMR has one heck of an operation--it wasn't going anywhere. It had acheived a critical mass in the DL system that could not be replaced without much pain.

The SA situation I think is the exact opposite. An airline created with an ulterior motive--to improve Republic Airways bottom line for an eventual IPO--does not preceed from the same position, as the pilots there are finding out.

In my book, the SA pilots are heroes, voting as they did knowing the potential ramifications. Other pilots at other airlines in much better "shape" have not been so steadfast, and that, IMHO, is unfortunate for everyone.

I spend around 2-3 hours a week trying to get a new job for a friend I have there at SA with other regionals where I know people. It is tough going (contibuting to the F U D). But he/she (not that this person is a he-she!) is qualified and personable and will bounce back no matter what.

You can't do much about mgmt's actions--especially with a republican white house. You can't always count on your MEC to act in your best interest. Like in the marines, maintain your situational awareness and keep your rifle ready. This is all just part of the job.

 

[172driver]

I am a new hire FO, basically at the very bottom of the list, and would be one of the first to go. However, I'm still on the 'heck no' list. I have much respect for what the CMR pilot group went through to get the PWA that I benefit from today. Is it my place to undermine their efforts for my own gain? I don't think so.

If we give concessions in a time when the company is making decent profits, where will it stop? Contracts should not be reopened unless the company is in jeopardy and then not until every other option has been exhausted.

If I have to work at Home Depot for a while, so be it. Many of the guys and gals who now enjoy some seniority were in my place in 2001. They didn't back down and neither will I.

 

[Caveman]

I'm a very junior Captain at Comair so if any seat displacements occur I'll be amoung the first to go back to the right seat. I was one of the 86 pilots at the bottom of the seniority list that were fired during the strike. After the strike we were rehired and briefly furloughed until they got the operation back up and running. I know what's at stake here and I'm willing to do what's required to not give back one dime unless it's absolutely necessary. So far they haven't even remotely convinced me that any concessions are needed. Now, if all they want to do is sweeten the pot in exchange for us giving up something relatively minor, then I'm all ears. There is such a thing as a mutually beneficial change to an agreement.

172Driver,

Well said D. I agree completely.

 

[surplus1]

Part 1 of 2

Treme,

A good post. You ask many relevant questions. While I'm reasonably sure your post is legitimate and well intended, consider this: Much of what you ask in fact promotes the meaning of the acronym "FUD". In other words, your questions generate Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. These elements are very real in all negotiations, whether they are a "union" request for a "new and improved" contract or a management request for "concessions".

Note: I don't sit on my airline's MEC so I can't speak for them. However, I do have my own ideas on the questions you ask, primarily as they relate to my own pilot group. We have been asked for concessions. I do not know what my MEC will do as yet, but I do know what is involved. It will take a lot of space to answer what you asked, but here is one pilots' opinion.

The steps with which the pilot group counters FUD, are pretty much the same in both cases. The ability to effectively use the counter attack (a concession request is an attack on the current contract) will vary considerably with each airline. The "game" of negotiations is a three-type game. It is similar to Chess (strategy), Poker (bluff) and Dice (luck), all combined. How you play the "game" depends on the experience of your negotiators, the politics of your union, the solidarity of your group, the strength and support of your parent union and of course, the determination of your management.

The bargaining can be "interest based" or "adversarial". The former works well when the parties have a common goal and much progress can be made. When the negotiations reach the final stages and the interests boil down to pure economics, the positions almost always evolve from interest based to adversarial. Success will require compromise by both parties. Whichever sees the compromise offered by the other to be less than adequate has the same outcome --- a breakdown in the negotiations and a resultant confrontation.

1. Whether or not it is the union asking for an improved contract or management asking for concessions, it is necessary that the negotiators know the state of the Company before they sit at the table. This requires serious and professional analysis of the Company's financials.

a. Management always has an "advantage" in this respect. They keep the "books" and only they know the true condition of the Company. Lack of information generates Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. Management will not miss the opportunity. Gloom and doom are good strategies, particularly when your are asking for concessions.

b. The pilot negotiators must gain full access to these "books" and must ensure that the information provided by management is accurate and complete. Without it, there is no basis from which to negotiate.

c. How this happens is substantially different with each corporate structure. When the airline is and "independent" stand-alone operation, e.g., AirTran, it is less difficult. When the structure is that of a conglomerate, e.g., Delta (with a "consolidated" financial statement), it is far more complex and time consuming.

d. Assuming that the financial information is in fact made available to the "union", it must then be verified and analyzed. Who does this analysis is especially critical. First, they must be professionally competent, but, and perhaps more importantly, they must also be trusted by the negotiators and the pilot group.

Note. In the case of a CMR, as an example, this situation is quite different today, from what it was in the last round of negotiations that preceded the Comair strike. Those negotiations began with CMR as an independent entity. There was extensive knowledge within the pilot group, of the Company's financial position. The information was made available. It was analyzed separately by the MEC's analysis team and by ALPA financial analysis. The pilot negotiators had a pretty good handle on where the Company really was.

Today, under Delta ownership, Comair's financial results are buried somewhere within Delta's consolidated statement. While it is well known that Delta is losing money, it is not nearly as easy to determine whether Comair is actually contributing to that loss, or helping to mitigate it. Whether or not Comair's operations are themselves profitable does not change the fact that the corporation as a whole is not profitable.

As an example of what I'm trying to say, if Delta went bankrupt tomorrow, all of its subsidiaries would also be bankrupt, whether or not they were individually profitable. Since none of the subsidiaries have any money of "their own", the financial state of the parent, affects every and anything that happens throughout the system. This is a very different game from what happened during the previous round of negotiations. The pilot negotiators and the pilot group must take this into consideration. Back on the main theme:

e. The financials that the negotiators will need are those of Delta, not those of Comair (which do not exist separately). Whether or not those will be made available is left to be seen.

f. That brings us back to the element of trust. We at Comair already know that Delta has made its financial information available to ALPA through the DMEC. ALPA has analyzed this information already and is using it to negotiate concessions at Delta Air Lines. Given the current conflict of interest between DMEC and CMEC, will ALPA make this information available to Comair negotiators? That is a question that I can't answer, but I do know that up until now, they have not. I have to ask why not, I also have to ask whether or not I can trust the information that we might get from ALPA. Here's a big "U" and "D" from the acronym FUD, only this time it comes not from management, but from the union we pay to represent our interests. I am uncertain and I doubt the legitimacy of that union's support. Do you think the Company is aware of these conflicts of interest? You can bet your job on it.

Until we can resolve these issues, the position of Comair pilots does not appear to be advantageous. Is there a way to overcome the conflicts of interests? I think there is. A) ALPA needs to resolve the internal conflicts of interest. B) The Comair MEC needs independent financial analysis and independent legal counsel (that it can trust), and should avail itself of both immediately.

Back on the main theme.

Should the MEC respond with NO, or Heck No.? In my opinion, that would be a mistake. We should always be willing to discuss critical issues with our management. When we perceive that we have a problem, we expect them to discuss it. It is necessary that we do the same in return. The best initial response might very well be "Why?".

Does "discussion" mean that we should be receptive of concessions? NO, Absolutely not! It does NOT mean that we should "open" our contract. It only means that if our management wants to talk, then we should talk.

IF the discussions lead to a demand from management that we make concessions, then we will have to make a decision to enter formal talks or not to do so, but those talks can and should be conducted, in my opinion, without a formal opening of the contract.

Does the MEC have a plan, you ask? I don't know. I will say that if they are not prepared for this, somebody hasn't been doing their homework. They had to know it was coming. Should they have started formal preparations before the fact? NO. In this case, time is on the side of the MEC. They need time to receive the financial data, and time to analyze it. Only then can they reasonably if the Company's request is justified economically and the extent of relief, if any, that might be required. The more time it takes the better for the pilots. Management does not hesitate to use the time line to its favor, when the union is asking for something. That is why a 4-year contract becomes a 7-year contract. "They" make it take 3 years to negotiate.

In this case, concessionary bargaining, the company is not in any imminent danger that concessions from this small group could avert. It is reasonable to assume that the Company's bottom line is actually being improved by the profitability of this subsidiary's operations. Therefore the union can, and I think should, employ the same strategy that the Company uses when the tables are turned, i.e., don't rush to solutions. The amendable date isn't that far away and being in Section 6 may very well be better than direct negotiations. Use the time line to your advantage and to counter the FUD.

The MEC must have the trust and confidence of the pilot group. This is achieved through information and communication. There will be some things (protected by confidentiality agreements with the Company that protect proprietary information) that the MEC will NOT be able to tell the pilots. The pilots must understand this reality. At the same time, the MEC must meet frequently with the pilots and keep them well informed as to the process, the Company's requests and the reasons for them. Good PR will pay big dividends and also reduce the FUD. Everything the Company says in public must be countered with a logical public response. The Company must not be allowed to win the PR battle, not with the media, the public and particularly the pilots.

Continued

 

[surplus1]

Part 2 of 2

Solidarity. The level of solidarity within the Comair group surprised everyone in the industry during the last dispute. That same level of solidarity must be renewed and achieved in this round of talks. Anything less will put the pilots at a disadvantage. In short, any pilot group negotiating without membership solidarity is at a disadvantage. The pilots must know that their solidarity is a key element in the process.

Many pilots have been hired at Comair since the strike, nearly 1/3 of the current seniority list. [A couple of these have already responded to your questions and indicated their unity with the group as a whole.] These are the very pilots that will be negatively affected if this doesn't go well. Every pilot that was at Comair before the strike has a responsibility to embrace his new brothers, teach them about the history of the Comair group, develop their sense of belonging, and remove the FUD that their relative "newness" may include. They need to know that together we stand, come he!! or high water. The MEC must join in this effort. We of Comair cannot allow ourselves to be divided into old timers and juniors.

"WE are Comair pilots, every last one of us, from the most senior to the most junior. Our seniors do not protect their own interests at the expense of our juniors. They have never done that in the past and will not do that now. Good or bad, we will stand as one and protect each other against all comers. That may sound like a lot of BS rhetoric, but it isn't. The "Semper Fi" tradition/motto of the Marine Corps is noteworthy, and we must learn to truly adopt the equivalent. We all have to know this and believe this. Our unity is our strength and we can't lose that. The fact that we don't leave our brothers behind no matter the risk to us all must be known and understood by all of us. That will eliminate the FUD among the junior pilots who may think they will be the only one's to suffer, and among the senior who might suspect that their juniors will not stand and fight with them. The same applies to any pilot group. Some have it, others don't. The winners all do.

In the "new" group at Comair, many are not entrants to the industry. They are familiar with the cultures from whence they came and may not have yet learned the differences in the Comair culture. It is up to us to convince them that we are not the same and that they are now a part of us. They must be assimilated fully and it is up to the rest of us to see that that happens. At Comair, I think we are up to the task. Other groups have to find their own way to accomplish the equivalent.

Can the Company transfer the equipment to other subsidiaries? Yes it can. We have the burden of making the Company realize that this is not a wise strategy. The potential receiving pilot groups have to reject these transfers.

To some it may appear to be a short-term gain that they may want to take advantage of. Those need to recognize that it is only a matter of time before they too will be subjected to the very same FUD. If they willingly take from us today, someone will take from them tomorrow --- it might even be us. It doesn’t really matter who does the taking. If it is our major partner's pilots, the day will come when they regret it. If it is our sister airline, the same applies. If it is one of the company's other subcontractors; they will harm themselves in the long term at least as much as they harm us in the short term. Each pilot group must take the time to convince other groups that it is not in their best interest overall, to assist in the demise of pilot brethren at another airline. That is akin to treachery or treason. This is tough to convey sometimes, but it is true just the same. A pilot group that is willing to refuse to fly struck work, should also be willing to refuse to facilitate a Company in destroying a legitimate contract with another airline via unnecessary concessions. Those that do not may well expand the definition of the "S" word.

Our leaders and pilots must communicate with the leaders and pilots of other carriers and keep them informed of what is going on this property and how we can help each other. None of us can afford isolationism in these trying times. We may think we are "islands" and can act or exist "alone" but the truth is, all airline pilots are in this together. If one of us loses big, so do all the others. It is really not a question of "IF" but a question of when. Either we all hang together or, one by one, we will each hang separately. This detail is often lost on many of us, particularly the "regionals", but it IS important and we should work to make it so.

You asked seven questions. I've tried to answer the first six of them. No doubt it could have been done with fewer words but I feel the answers need more than a yes or a no, and my thoughts of how to do it are more than simple responses. .

With respect to your number 7, Will management just go home if we simply say NO? You can bet they will not. They will fight for what they want and they will use whatever means is available to them. We must expect that. If we are prepared, if we stand together, if we are reasonable, we can hold our own. NO, is not always the right answer. If what they want is justifiable, then we must and should help. However, when it is not justifiable, as appears to be the case at Comair, we must not give in to unreasonable demands. Yes, we will negotiate but we will certainly not just surrender. Can we overcome the FUD? I have faith in my fellow pilots. We did it before and we can do it again.

Semper Fi and "Whatever It Takes".

 

[surplus1]

Caveman & 172diriver

You guys both make me proud.

Thanks.

 

[Treme]

Dear Surplus,

Thank you for your very thorough response.

I like the part in which you write, "we don't leave our brothers behind"

It sounds good, and its good press. A few years back US Airways, former MEC chairman Chris Beebe stood up at a Philadelphia MEC meeting and shouted "Not One Nickle, Not One Job!"

BOY did it sound good. Gave everyone a warm, fuzzy feeling and everything. However times change and now they have given more than a few nickles, and over 1800 jobs.

So at your company, for example, what do you believe the company's response to "heck no" will be? Certainly there will be retribution and that retribution will more than likely have an impact on your junior pilots.

What will your MEC do in order to "not leave their brothers behind" while at the same time attemping to preserve your PWA?

It seems to me that those goals may not be compatible.

Again I am not saying that you, or any pilot group for that matter, should capitulate to management (ESPECIALLY Comair after fighting for 89 days), but at the same time I think people should realize that there is a cost associated with saying no and that cost may not just be a bit longer upgrade or a short-term furlough. It could be much, much worse since traditionally senior pilots protect their own compensation and lifestyle at the expense of their junior counterparts.

Respectfully continuing the discussion,
Treme

 

[100LL... Again!]

True solidarity will be hard to achieve as long as the current union/seniority system is in place.

The extremely wide range in pay and schedule between the most junior and the most senior helps cause this. It can be hard for the junior pilots to be wound and ready to fight when it could result in furloughs.

It can be hard for the senior pilots to get excited about giving up the types of raises they expect in order to get a bunch of new airplanes that will really only help the junior pilots upgrade.

If pay and schedule were a little more uniform, I think it would be much harder to divide the pilot group over an issue.

Somewhat off-topic, but needed to be said.

 

[surplus1]

Dear Surplus,

Thank you for your very thorough response.

I like the part in which you write, "we don't leave our brothers behind"

It sounds good, and its good press. A few years back US Airways, former MEC chairman Chris Beebe stood up at a Philadelphia MEC meeting and shouted "Not One Nickle, Not One Job!"

Treme,

I was excited when you liked the part that I wrote (quoted above). Then when you unfortunately chose the comparison of the former AAA Chairman's remarks I was instantly distraught. There are so many other ALPA notables with whom I would have much prefered to be compared. The policies of that particular gentleman are anathema to my own thought process.

What I said was not meant to sound "warm and fuzzy", it was intended in sincerity. Each airline has its own culture and some actually have no culture at all. I spoke to the culture at my own airline, Comair.

We did not always have that sense of protecting and caring for each other. It took many years to achieve. The strike was our first real chance to prove that we had in fact acquired that sense of loyalty to each other, and we did.

As you point out, times have changed. We have added hundreds of new pilots since our last "test". Some were brand new to the industry and many others, as I said earlier, came from a variety of other airlines with cultures of their own. I'm not certain as to how well they have embraced the Comair culture but I do hope that they have. It is certainly in their own interest to have done so. If we are tested again, we will know. However, since those realitively "new" folks are the one's that would be "abandoned" if we changed course, I'm not too worried. The core of our group, already tested, is not likely to let them down.

So at your company, for example, what do you believe the company's response to "heck no" will be? Certainly there will be retribution and that retribution will more than likely have an impact on your junior pilots.

I could only speculate as to what my company's response to "heck no" might be and conjecture is not very productive. I would hope that the company will make reasonable proposals which I suspect would be met by reasonable responses. If that is not the case, then confrontation is possible. At this stage of the game I personally prefer to see the glass as "half full". Time will tell.

What will your MEC do in order to "not leave their brothers behind" while at the same time attemping to preserve your PWA? It seems to me that those goals may not be compatible.

I don't see the incompatability of those goals that you do. Perhaps that is because you and I come from a "different culture" of which I spoke earlier. As I see it, we stand together as one in defense of our PWA. If it should prove that we are unable to defend it successfully, then we take the "hit" together. What we do NOT do is preserve some of it for a privileged (senior) few at the expense of the remainder (junior). That has been our modus operandi in the past and I hope we will do it again in the future.

As an example, 10 years ago the seniors (captains) could have substantially improved their book pay, by agreeing to lesser compensation or flat rates for the juniors (first officers) as many other "regionals" have done. Instead, the seniors gave up the desire for more, so that the juniors could have a fair percentage across the board (60%). As yet another example, 5 years ago, when the proverbial flow-through carrot was dangled, the seniors could have taken it, benefited themselves and left the juniors to suffer the future downside (which is now upon us). They didn't. No one "flowed" but no one was left behind either, and no one is on the streets. That broke with the "tradition" of others and the concept that the juniors had little value. We didn't like that tradition so we threw it out and established our own. Two years ago, when the chips were down, we held that line not as juniors and seniors, but as Comair pilots. I have faith that we can do that again and I believe that the majority of my fellows share that faith.

That is not to say that we don't have differences among us for we of course do. In times of peace some might think that we are not even related. However, when we face adversity, we circle the wagons and defend each other as "brothers", not in name but in fact. Perhaps I am naieve, but I honestly trust my fellow pilots to do what is right for the whole, whatever the price that some might have to pay.

Again I am not saying that you, or any pilot group for that matter, should capitulate to management (ESPECIALLY Comair after fighting for 89 days), but at the same time I think people should realize that there is a cost associated with saying no and that cost may not just be a bit longer upgrade or a short-term furlough. It could be much, much worse since traditionally senior pilots protect their own compensation and lifestyle at the expense of their junior counterparts.

I understand what you are saying and I agree that there is a cost with saying "no", and the price could be high. "NO" is not automatically the right answer. I doubt Comair pilots will capitulate, but I also do not think that the senior pilots will protect their own compensation at the expense of their junior counterparts jobs. As I said before, I think we will hold the line together or take the hit together, as the case may be.

In battle there is danger and it war there are casualties. However, the "officers" don't abandon the "men" in time of peril. Not unless they are cowards. There is evidence that we are not cowards and their is no evidence that we might become such.

Collective bargaining is not really the same as war. In a true war there are only two options, win or lose. In collective bargaining there are three options, victory, defeat or compromise. More often than not the latter is the more prudent course.

This round in the struggle for equity is not the first and it will not be the last. There will be future battles and new opportunities in the future. We must choose our battles wisely. It is often smarter to lose one or two battles of our choosing today, but win the war tomorrow. As long as the MEC does not "fiddle while Rome burns", we will be able to meet the challenges that face us and emerge with our dignity intact. As Roosevelt said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

I am an idealist but also a pragmatist. "Full pay to the last day" is not an intelligent slogan. I hope that we will stick to "Whatever it takes." It has served us well, it is flexible, and it should serve us well again.

Regards,

 

[Treme]

The Adventures of ALPA

Surplus,

Again, thank you. I find ALPA to be an interesting study of human nature. If what you say about the Comair pilot group is true, than they have been able to achieve something truly amazing.

Granted my experiences with the association have been quite different than yours have been. Hopefully MECs industrywide will take a good, close, look at Comair and try to emulate it rather than exploit what they perceive to be a weakness and offer to do what Comair pilots may not be willing to do.

If history is indicative of what we can expect, I think you and I will agree that there are a few other pilot groups standing at the ready to pounce. That, unfortunately, is part of the race for the bottom we read about so frequently on this board.

I thought after pay-for-training went away that airline management had finished exploiting regional airline pilots -- it seems they've just changed their approach with this latest round of concessions. It is a frustrating time to be an airline pilot regardless of where you sit. Planning for the future and for the continued financial well-being of our families is difficult with a big question-mark hovering over not only our compensation, but our very job-security!

In the meantime it seems as though we have little choice but to sit back and watch how the association chooses to attack these challenges on each property. They are, after all, writing the next chapter in "Flying The Line".

So far it is a very disapointing, very thin read. (comic book?)

 

[scotts]

F.U.D...

Treme,

Are you management?

Why are you propagating these ideas that instill F.U.D. in the various pilot groups?

If you do work for an airline, which one? Are you willing to tell us who you are to lend some credibility to your posts?

Your initial post and follow-ups seem to have the ear-marks of a chief pilot or management type who is fishing for info to use in future or current negotiations.

If I'm wrong, please excuse me for my paranoia.

scotts

 

[Treme]

Scotts,

Like most people I prefer to remain anonymous on these boards. I'm furloughed US Airways and, as such, have very little faith in ALPA to protect either the PWA OR my job.

I'm sorry if I gave you the wrong idea but I assure you I am not, nor do I have any aspiration to be, management.

 

[jarhead]

I am Management

Yes, It's true.....I am the head of a major airline's negotiating committee, and I have been taking names for months of all you S.O.B.s on these boards for a long time now. I am just about to the point where I can figure out which of you are other management people lurking under a psudonym. Then I can eliminate those guys, and figure out which companies the rest of you work for, and then by golly,, I'll have you all in my clutches. Yes, I think that out of the roughly 80,000 pilots who work under ALPA and APA, the roughly 100 or so repeat posters on these boards, will give me a scientific sampling of the sentiment of the rank and file pilots who never even heard of this web site. I will surely have the upper hand in writing up a "final offer" for your next contract! MWOOHAHAHAHAHAH

 

[surplus1]

Originally posted by TremeSurplus,

Again, thank you. I find ALPA to be an interesting study of human nature. If what you say about the Comair pilot group is true, than they have been able to achieve something truly amazing.

Treme,

Thank you for your thought provoking reply. It is nice to exchange points of view without vitriol and animosity.

I agree that ALPA, as a whole, is an interesting study. My views of the Comair group are of course somewhat biased and reflect a world that, on the inside, may not be as "perfect" as I try to portray. In general however, I do not think that what I have said diverges much from what I have experienced as a member of that group. Naturally I am concerned that the bond between CMR pilots could disintegrate if the "right sequence" of events were to present itself. However, I hang on to the optimism that it will not.

As I wrote to you I was trying to convey my own experiences with the Comair pilot group, not with the ALPA. My experiences with "the Association" are a horse of a very different color. The two (CMR as a small group and ALPA as the umbrella) are in marked contrast to each other. This is no accident. Comair pilot leaders spent years (literally) in a concentrated effort to bring about internal unity and to eschew the ALPA standard of dog-eat-dog. It was not easy but we did it.

I would not define my experiences with the ALPA as satisfactory (among the reasons I did not appreciate a comparison with your former Chairman). ALPA is of course not a true entity, is not alive and does not think. The "Association" is no more than a reflection of the individuals and coalitions that control it from time to time. As an example, there have been many Presidents of these United States. Only a handful have been notable enough to remember with favor. The leaders of ALPA are no different and most, if not all, have been servants of their self-interest as opposed to champions of the profession that they claim to be. I am not young (unfortunately) and in addition to reading about ALPA's history I have been able to watch it unfold directly both as a member and an "insider" for a long time. What you see on the surface as ALPA is decidedly not what you get. ALPA's leadership has been rife with double speaking, double-dealing, backbiting opportunists with little interest in anything other than there own power. That ALPA has done as well as it has is not a tribute to its political leaders. It has survived and prospered in spite of them rather than because of them. I think that is mostly because the staff (of ALPA) is professional and dedicated. There have been truly outstanding individual pilots and staff employees that have given years of their lives unselfishly to developing ALPA's expertise in the areas of Safety, aeromedical, accident investigation, and liaison with the regulatory agencies (CAB/FAA/NMB). ALPA has also done well in the political arena with congressional legislation that favors the interests of airline pilots. ALPA has been effective in organizing airline pilots and financial analysis of airline operations.

Where ALPA glaringly falls short is in Representation. ALPA has failed in developing inter relationships between the member airlines and the governance of the Association. ALPA has not succeeded in creating unity of purpose among its membership, but instead fosters conflict of interest and divisiveness. ALPA maintains an internal political structure that is without balance or oversight. Power and control of the institution is concentrated in the hands of a few, often at the expense of the majority. Protection of the interest of minorities is absent from the ALPA system. In my opinion, this internal political structure is the direct cause of ALPA's representational difficulties. In lieu of minimizing conflicts of interest it fosters and magnifies them. Many have tried to change this as the industry evolved, but the ALPA politicians, those who hold the real power within the association are reluctant to relinquish any of that power. Righting these wrongs would require substantial reorganization of the electoral and governance structure and effect the distribution of "wealth" within the union. That kind of change is not easily achieved.

ALPA is a political organization. The politicians that rise to positions of power within the ALPA are little different from those that we see in other political organizations. There are many (over time) who seek, acquire and wield great power over the institution. There are very few that rise to the level of "statesmen". As Shaw said, "Power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely." The way that these people operate behind the scenes is little different than the infamous machine of Mayor Daly (Sr.) of Chicago. Nevertheless we have little else, so we must cling to ALPA and hope that we can achieve change from within. It will continue to be an uphill battle.

You mentioned human nature. It is diverse and complex but there are some basic characteristics, in Western civilization, which we define as "good". They are not prevalent in everyday life and they are virtually absent in ALPA. Most people, self included, are selfish, greedy, inconsiderate, and far less than altruistic. ALPA reflects that lack of quality in character across the board. It's history is one of hegemony, predatory behavior, and exploitation of the weak (member) by the strong. The Code of Ethics if full of all the right virtues. Unfortunately the real code of conduct is as removed from that as it could possibly be. When the opportunity presents itself, one ALPA group is often not only willing but eager to "cut the throat" of another ALPA group.



Unfortunately there are more than a "few" pilot groups at the "ready to pounce". Most are at the ready to undermine and take from others to improve their own lot whenever they can. It is the exception that you find a pilot group unwilling to cheer at the misfortune of another. The loose federation that is ALPA promotes this behavior. The history of ALPA reflects it clearly. We can only hope that within a particular pilot group we could avoid emulating this "norm". That is what I hope for in the Comair group; that is what I think we have achieved.



I'm afraid that exploitation by those in power, be it management or union, of those without power is here to stay. Regional pilots are today the unfortunate beneficiaries of this two-barreled assault. We must fight for survival against our management and against our "union". Most of us are too small to form our own unions and still fend off this two-front attack. Leaving ALPA would only make matters worse for us. We are forced therefore to seek other means of neutering the attacks from our union while we struggle to protect our interests from less than benevolent management. It is a difficult task on both fronts. Many of today's small carriers will not survive it.



We do have some choices other than watching and waiting for the union to attack the challenges (which it is NOT doing). Many Comair pilots and ASA pilots have resorted to the courts in an attempt to prevent that union, which we pay to represent our interests, from destroying our interests as it attempts to promote the conflicting interests of other members. Naturally, this does not make us "popular" with those pilot groups that would lead our destruction if they could. Lack of popularity is a small price to pay in exchange for survival. The only thing I have difficulty in understanding is why the many others that have been deliberately wronged do not choose to defend themselves. They remind me of Lord Chamberlain. Appeasement of their adversaries will not prevent the transfer of their jobs or the loss of their rights or the elimination of their careers. Those that are unwilling to aggressively defend what little they have will surely lose it to those that already have far more, but want it all.

I am sure the good Professor "H" could do a fine job of writing Flying The Line III. We must remember however that his "publisher" is the Air Line Pilots Association itself. Autobiographies are seldom unkind to their authors. What "history" of ALPA is ultimately recorded and published in "Volume III" is not likely to be "complete". If he tells all, he will simply not be funded or published. If he tells what the powers that be wish to have told, we will see FTL III. I know the good professor and he is an honorable man. I wish I could say the same for those who control the publication of his historical accounts of the ALPA. They will simply exclude him from those things that they do not wish him to know, lest he write them down. It has happened before.

Regards

 

[Treme]

Again I appreciate the benefit of your experience.

I will closely watch what happens (as i'm sure we all will on Flightinfo.com) with the Comair concession request. Hopefully there will be a resolution which will allow for continued prosperity for your company without any job-loss.

If the association there is as tight-knit as you say then it should be a model for ALPA to strive for at EACH member company. If you folks can get through this without any furloughs you can be certain that i'll be writing to MY LEC and asking them why we can't be a little bit more like Comair.

Good luck and thanks for answering my questions -- I wish that a few other people had taken the time to offer their opinions.

 

[surplus1]

Treme,

I wish you luck and hope you can get back to flying soon.

I have lots of friends at your airline (USAirways). They are all quite senior and none are furloughed. Some are extremely unhappy with the behavior of your MEC and of ALPA and at least one is actively trying to change it. I've wished him luck, but I'm not too optimistic.

I sincerely hope that the Comair group will be able to deal with this request for concessions in a way that is beneficial to Comair pilots and that we can maintain our solidarity throught the process, whatever it may turn out to be. Even if we do, I candidly don't see any major airline emulating our ways. After all, we are just a "commuter" and none of the high and mighty would consider what we do as being important, unless of course it keeps them from getting something that they want.

Thanks for the exchange.

 

[Treme]

Just out of curiosity, what are they asking for?

And what are you asking in return? Any idea?