Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

NPA BoD endorses last-minute T.A.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Hal,
I greatly appreciate what you are saying. I am jealous of the relationship you have between your union (pilot group) and your management team. Heck, for that matter I'm just plain jealous of your management team having accomplished all that they have and still treated their employees like human beings. We unfortunately do not enjoy that kind of rapport with our "management." I'm not saying ALPA is a panacea but it would be an improvement for us in our current situation. It appears to me that the in house union only works if management is willing to work with us, not steamroll us at every opportunity. If ALPA shows up here then JL and SK have no one to thank but themselves for driving us to it.
 
On another note. Bringing in ALPA will not necessarily solve all your problems. They are better than IBT, but if you have the same leadership in place it is no better than what you have.

Not really true. Even with the current incompetent leadership, at least we would have more resources and services at our disposal with ALPA. At the end game of negotiations, ALPA typically sends a small team of lawyers to assist the negotiating committee, along with someone from E & FA to cost things on the spot. The NPA doesn't have close to the resources to provide that sort of support. Thankfully we have Seth Rosen, but he's just one guy. I'd much rather have a team of ALPA's best lawyers looking over our scope language than just Seth.

ALPA national is in it to make money off of your dues.
Common misconception. A majority of ALPA's 41 member carriers actually cost the Association more than they pay in in dues. Only the largest legacy carriers are able to support their own costs plus send extra money to National. The extra that they bring in is used to subsidize the other carriers that can't cover their own costs. The idea that ALPA only represents carriers to "make money" is absurd. If that was the case, ALPA would drop about 80% of the carriers that they represent and just stick with the big guys.

They provide services to the membership, for a price. They do have better resources and training, but it's still up to your local. If it stinks, the whole will smell also. National will sign off on anything. ALPA is overrated.
It's certainly true that who you elect at the local level is extremely important, but I'll point you to the CAL MEC for a perfect example of how that's not the only thing that matters. When CAL was independent with the IACP, they had some truly great leaders running things. The problem is that they simply didn't have the resources needed to make large steps ahead for their pilot group. You can ask pretty much anyone from CAL ALPA that was also involved with the IACP, and they'll happily tell you how inferior their "student council" was compared to ALPA, despite the fact that many of the same volunteers were involved in both.

I think the problem is that many members don't really have an idea of just what ALPA makes available to them. If every member had an opportunity to go to the Herndon and DC offices to see the resources at their disposal and to meet the die-hard trade-unionist staff that works for them, then very few members would ever claim that they could do fine without ALPA.
 
"have not talked to a single soul who would not vote for MB if given the chance"


I would not vote for MB or the other two guys that are running. I hope we geat a larger group to choose from.
 
The company will get what they want. They will continue to add little "improvements" to the TA until it get 51%.

My guess it that the NPA will show us how things have changed from the previous TA's but will not point out the concessions from current book.

There is no way the NPA could have fix this TA. It should have been voted down months ago. There is no reason for us to accept a concessionary TA.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top