Pilot Unions exist for the safety of pilots and passengers.

[YourPilotFriend]

Why hasn't this message been communicated lately? Didn't the founding memebers of ALPA die in plane crashes? Shouldn't this be a pivotal slogan in the fight against union busting?

 

[pilotyip]

Does that mean I am safer on AAL than on Jet Blue?

 

[YourPilotFriend]

yesss

 

[GroundHog]

Does that mean I am safer on AAL than on Jet Blue?

If you haven't already, make sure you read "Flying The Line." The rules that we fly by today did not come about by the generosity of management or the efforts of an enlightened government. Rather the rules we fly by today are a direct result of the efforts of a group of pilots who were determined to insure that safety was more important than the bottom line.
The "what have you done for me lately" mentality of todays pilots does a grave disservice to the efforts of those pilots who put their lives and their livelihoods on the line in order to see even the most modest gains in safety. (Does anyone here really believe that 8 or 9 hours between duty period is adequate in all situations?)
Unions are not the enemy. Unions have done more for the piloting profession than most pilots are willing to admit.

Pilotyp, this isn't directed at you. And it isn't directed at JetBlue pilots either. But to answer your question, no. You are not safer on AA than on JetBlue. You are safer because a group of pilots in the early days of aviation decided to form a union for the expressed goal of bringing safety to their chosen profession.

Schedule with safety.

Hog

 

[warbirdfinder]

Very well put!

 

[Huck]

Pilot Unions DO exist for the safety of pilots and passengers.But how can we convince the general public of this when on a pilot web board we have thread titles like "What does your 1.95% do for you"?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The predecessor to and therefore the NTSB was created primarily due to ALPA. ALPA pushed legislation that a seperate entity to investigate aircraft accidents, due to the excessive pilot error label that was being placed on too many accidents. At the time it the CAA (FAA at the time) was conducting these accidents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Aeronautics_Board

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0966551400/qid=1135257586/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-7778640-5935901?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Now, the NTSB is the safety organization that oversees not only aviation but highway, maritime, rail etc....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

.....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Pilot Unions DO exist for the safety of pilots and passengers.But how can we convince the general public of this when on a pilot web board we have thread titles like "What does your 1.95% do for you"?

This is what helps ALPA be more than a trade union and a professioal association. Its Safety and Engineering Dept is well respected. ALPA has been called the [safety] conscience of the air line industry.....

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:z7LQhSICB74J:www.nmb.gov/documents/rla50-chapter04.pdf+Civil+Aeronautics+Act+alpa&hl=en

 

[pilotyip]

I have read the book and I am a former ALPA member; my airline went out of business. I could not agree more ALPA has made the airline industry a better place to work from getting pilots single rooms on overnights in the 40's and setting industry standards like respecting seniority plus the push for better aircraft and safety. There is a probability that the industry would not be as safe as it is without ALPA. However all that aside, ALPA did not adjust to a changing industry and kept raising the costs to airlines that allowed upstarts to come in a take away market share

 

[GroundHog]

Pilotyp,
I apologize for the positioning of my post. I didn't need to include your quote. I made the mistake of looking at your profile after I pushed the submit button, and it was then that I realized I was probably preaching to the choir. Thank you for your reasoned response.

...However all that aside, ALPA did not adjust to a changing industry and kept raising the costs to airlines that allowed upstarts to come in a take away market share

I agree. To a point. ALPA did not adjust quickly enough to the changing industry, without a doubt. As for raising costs, it may be one of the reasons for our current situation, but it is only one in a myriad of others.
It certainly didn't help our public image, which was originally what this thread was concerned with before I sidetracked it.
Tailwinds,
Hog

 

[Publishers]

You would have to be carefull in taking this tact. ALPA became a force as much from being in a regulated industry standpoint as any safety group. The minute that the industry was deregulated, much of thier umph went with it.

The arrogance of management everyone so quickly gets in a huff about was the same arrogance ALPA and legacy crews exhibited at deregulation.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The arrogance of management everyone so quickly gets in a huff about was the same arrogance ALPA and legacy crews exhibited at deregulation.

And arrogance is often a result of a lack of security. In ones self or environement...

 

[maru657]

You'ed be amazed at how many pilots voted for de-regulation or voted for politicians who were for de-regulation and then were surprised by the results. A bunch of these old boys invested their life savings in a start up called Pride Air in Texas. If you've never heard of this company it's understandable, it lasted about as long as a 5 dollar throw in Hong Kong. Unfortunetely, many of the pilots who supported that abortion worked for UAL, AA and Delta and basically got away with destroying the industry as far as a stable job platform. Funny but now those chickens are coming home to roost and the recipients are uasually younger people who had nothing to do with the descision. Today I see all of these young enterprisers running companies into bankruptcy and swearing that re-regulation would be a bad thing or that regulation would be socialist. Of course you'll notice none of them wind up on the street without a golden parachute. A friend while serving as MEC once suggested that the company replace most of management with baboons, He suggested that at least the results wouldn't be any worse than the status quo.

 

[pilotyip]

Reregulation would be good for a few of the pilots, it would raise air fares, which decrease the number people buying tickets, which result in fewer airplanes needed and fewer pilots needed. There are probably 5-10 times the numbers of airline pilot jobs today compared to 1975. You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Cardinal]

The single most important thing my contract does for me is allow me to say NO. NO, I'm not flying that unsafe airplane. NO, I'm not flying in that weather. Ask a Part 135 guy how it feels to know that if you don't take the flight, you won't eat next week.

 

[pilotyip]

Cardinal, the contract will not protect you from being discharged for refusing to fly what you determine is an unsafe airplane. I worked for union carrier where a Captain refused to fly an airplane with an item he considered unsafe, the company said it was properly deferred via the MEL, take it or you do not work here. Another union pilot flew the airplane that night. The union could not restore his job. Now if there is a company that wants you to fly illegally then you owe it the company and yourself to quit.

 

[YourPilotFriend]

Yeah you can quit, but what about the passengers you left behind. Their safety is our job, not theirs. There will always be that guy who will fly that airplane with those passengers. Not standing up for ourselves and saying NO to management, is neglecting our #1 job.