Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The FAA and NTSB come to mind.Of course its a priority. What other entity has helped make this profession as safe as it is?
This career has become a joke. A safer joke, but a joke none-the-less.Airlines come and go but many of the pilots who worked there go to other airlines and ALPA continues to make the industry more safe for them despite the poor decisions of their previous employers.
...And the alternative would be what, exactly?
By the way, what sort of work do you do for YOUR pilot group?
Correction...it's no longer a profession, but a hobby.What other entity has helped make this profession as safe as it is?
The FAA and NTSB come to mind.
This career has become a joke. A safer joke, but a joke none-the-less.
And at least ALPA has its credibility intact, and that has paid off in dividends for the pilot groups [sarcasm]
Correction...it's no longer a profession, but a hobby.
(A safer hobby at that)
And who is a party to every NTSB investigation dealing with an ALPA carrier (whose expertise from ALPA's Engineering and Air Safty department they rely on)? And who is asked to participate in ARCs and Call to Action meetings by the FAA? And who is the current FAA administrator?
ALPA has paid off in dividends to all pilots, members or not by helping make the act of piloting safer, whether its a hobby, for business, entertainment, humanitarian, or as a way to earn a living.
Come on now Nevets. Every organization eventually outlives its usefulness. Possibly ALPA has met its end of useful existence. Simply because they are there means only that they have been around longer and allowed to become more bloated with useless positions on the backs of its union members. Don't get me wrong. I still believe an organization that extends protections bound by law is a good thing. ALPA itself has been around too long and grown too powerful as lobby organization. Fire every single head of ALPA every other term and I begin to feel better about them. Until them, they are just another outfit that is self serving for the "policy makers."
Just because you don't agree with every single head of ALPA does not mean that ALPA has outlived its usefulness. I dont always agree with everything ALPA does. And I'm not necessarily against term limits either. But by definition, ALPA, or any other organization is self serving.
For all that Babbitt is worth, we might as well have Cohen heading up the FAA. We haven't heard much about flight and duty times in a while have we? When asked whether or not disparaging pay rates contributed to fatigue, Babbitt was johnny-on-the-spot to roll the pilots under the bus in front of a senate subcomittee. To paraphrase, he said something along the lines of "This isn't about pay....it's about a lack of professionalism" All of that other crap about ALPA watching investigations from the sidelines is filler that they fluff up their resume with. At the end of the day...it doesn't mean jack.And who is a party to every NTSB investigation dealing with an ALPA carrier (whose expertise from ALPA's Engineering and Air Safty department they rely on)? And who is asked to participate in ARCs and Call to Action meetings by the FAA? And who is the current FAA administrator?
I disagree. Lower pay rates means higher turnover which equates to lost talent which in turn makes it a little more dangerous to be the flying public.ALPA has paid off in dividends to all pilots, members or not by helping make the act of piloting safer, whether its a hobby, for business, entertainment, humanitarian, or as a way to earn a living.
That becomes the problem though. Term limits alleviate the issue though. However, ALPA has been around a VERY long time. Plenty of time for certain habits to formed that do not necessarily justify their existence. My thought was pure speculation as far as ALPA outliving its usefulness as an organization. Although witht he current train of thought, it may have in fact be reaching the end of its existence.
ALPA and Obama have so much in common.
They both claim that everything that is good, is because of them.
Everything that is bad, is because of someone else.
ALPA making things safer? Debatable. They've been fighting for new flight and duty rules for the last 40yrs. Everything is an ALPA contract is pretty close to FAA FAR's. Maybe :30 or :60 minute difference.
For all that Babbitt is worth, we might as well have Cohen heading up the FAA. We haven't heard much about flight and duty times in a while have we? When asked whether or not disparaging pay rates contributed to fatigue, Babbitt was johnny-on-the-spot to roll the pilots under the bus in front of a senate subcomittee. To paraphrase, he said something along the lines of "This isn't about pay....it's about a lack of professionalism" All of that other crap about ALPA watching investigations from the sidelines is filler that they fluff up their resume with. At the end of the day...it doesn't mean jack.
I disagree. Lower pay rates means higher turnover which equates to lost talent which in turn makes it a little more dangerous to be the flying public.
Thanks for dropping the ball ALPA.
Yes...that is my position. We're not flying Jenny's for E.L. Chord today. There will ALWAYS be room for improvement. But as far as the job itself goes, when it can't pay the bills anymore, all the safety stuff becomes window dressing.Doesn't mean jack? That is your argument? Nothing to back up that claim? Don't be so quick to throw Babbitt under the bus as well. His tenure is not over yet. And I'm confident that he will change the rest rules in the near future.
No...my position primarily applies to the regionals. They're just stepping stones, you know.Even if I agreed with your premise, what you said about turnover did not disprove the fact that ALPA has made piloting safer.
But you can't have it both ways anyways. You blame ALPA for age 65, yet that helped the turnover you say erodes safety.
Yes...that is my position. We're not flying Jenny's for E.L. Chord today. There will ALWAYS be room for improvement. But as far as the job itself goes, when it can't pay the bills anymore, all the safety stuff becomes window dressing.
No...my position primarily applies to the regionals. They're just stepping stones, you know.
Experienced pilots aren't leaving the industry because a lack of safety. I'll let you add 2 and 2 together.Still nothing to back up your position though.
This argument undermines ALPA's contributions to safety and highlights the real issue: Pilot compensation. As modern as the Q400 is, it ultimately boiled down to the 2 pilots up front. Had they been compensated accordingly, they could have afforded hotel rooms instead of resorting to the crew room for rest. With all due respect to the family's of those who died in the crash....they want to have their cake and eat it to, i.e. low ticket prices AND the best pilots out there. It doesn't work that way. It's a shame that ALPA hasn't exploited the pay issue more.Of course there is always room for improvement, hence why ALPA is at the sunshine meeting today and pushing congress to pass HR3371.
I don't think the relatives of Colgan 3407 think the safety stuff is window dressing.
That doesn't mean much to the pilots leaving the industry for other careers.Age 65 has also stopped the turnover at regionals so your argument holds no water.
Incompetent ALPA idiots will pay United Pilots 44 million dollars in a settlement for goofing up their retirement allocation. Good heavens, this is $830 per member. FK ALPA, All day, all night...
Experienced pilots aren't leaving the industry because a lack of safety. I'll let you add 2 and 2 together.
This argument undermines ALPA's contributions to safety and highlights the real issue: Pilot compensation. As modern as the Q400 is, it ultimately boiled down to the 2 pilots up front. Had they been compensated accordingly, they could have afforded hotel rooms instead of resorting to the crew room for rest. With all due respect to the family's of those who died in the crash....they want to have their cake and eat it to, i.e. low ticket prices AND the best pilots out there. It doesn't work that way. It's a shame that ALPA hasn't exploited the pay issue more.
That doesn't mean much to the pilots leaving the industry for other careers.
Nice spin, but you missed the point. Safety isn't a top priority. Pay has always been the top priority. Just look in your Bible.You make my point for me. Pilots are not leaving this profession because of the lack of safety. Many of the pilots flying Jennys for E.L. Chord left the profession by way of untimely death in an aircraft accident. The fact that is not the case anymore speaks volumes to ALPA's fight to make piloting safer.
With slogans like "Live to fight another day" they're ASKING for management's abuse.You act as if ALPA tells CEOs to pay us less.
Any guess would be pure speculation. ALPA is and always has been on property at Mesa with JO at the helm.Do you think JO would pay or treat his pilots as little as he does now if ALPA was not on property?
The current practice of bending over and taking it in the shorts for the preservation of the Union is setting unacceptable precedents for the industry. Living to fight another day is only helping assure that the bar stays lower.This is part of why I say pilots are their own worst enemy. They fight each other when its not pilots wishing that they get paid less. Its management that tries to pay us less. Pilots need to stop fighting each other about how best to get pay up and start actually doing something about it.
Totally relevant! It shows that safety isn't a top priority for pilots.Irrelevant to the fact I was stating that ALPA has made piloting safer.
You conveniently left out the part I mentioned about rest related issues regarding pay. If a pilot can't afford to live in base (a very common occurence these days) he or she must commute. At the regional level, most pilots can't afford a hotel room and must settle for a crashpad. No studies need to be done to know that the quality of rest at a crashpad is nowhere near as good as a hotel room. Some pilots can't even afford a crashpad and resort to staying in the crew room. Are these pilots Safe?You say less pay erodes safety because of pilots leaving the profession.
I thought we were in the regionals forum...no? Anywho, you brought up age 65 (I suspect in a lame attempt to divert attention away from the topic) And for the record, you said, "Age 65 has also stopped the turnover at regionals". Stopped? FALSE. Pilots are still leaving the airline industry regardless of Age 65 (Due to lack of pay and benefits). Replacing an experienced line pilot with a newbie...do you honestly think this is making the industry safer?I say you can't have it both ways because when ALPA didn't oppose age 65 and therefore lowering attrition, and by your deduction, increase safety (due to lower attrition), you still blame them for age 65 anyways. Then you backtracked and said your position was only towards regionals, I said that age 65 has also lowered attrition there as well.
Because safety comes after pay and benefits. If you can't address the first two issues, you're going to have a problem retaining talent. In effect...making the industry (not the act of piloting, mind you) less safe.And now that I have shown that not only is attrition (for whatever reason) is irrelevant to ALPA helping make piloting safer, you can only say that it doesn't mean much to those pilots leaving the industry.
Nevets, I'll concede that ALPA has assisted in making the act of piloting safer. As far as making the industry safer? I have conclusively proven that due to ALPA's incompetence, the industry is less safe. You do, however, exemplify the typical disconnect between ALPA and the pilots. Pilots need better pay and benefits...and ALPA is too busy working on side issues.Again, irrelevant to the fact that ALPA has helped increase safety of piloting and never have you disproved that fact with anything of relevance.
You make my point for me. Pilots are not leaving this profession because of the lack of safety. Many of the pilots flying Jennys for E.L. Chord left the profession by way of untimely death in an aircraft accident. The fact that is not the case anymore speaks volumes to ALPA's fight to make piloting safer.
Nice spin, but you missed the point. Safety isn't a top priority. Pay has always been the top priority. Just look in your Bible.
With slogans like "Live to fight another day" they're ASKING for management's abuse.
Any guess would be pure speculation. ALPA is and always has been on property at Mesa with JO at the helm.
The current practice of bending over and taking it in the shorts for the preservation of the Union is setting unacceptable precedents for the industry. Living to fight another day is only helping assure that the bar stays lower.
Totally relevant! It shows that safety isn't a top priority for pilots.
You conveniently left out the part I mentioned about rest related issues regarding pay. If a pilot can't afford to live in base (a very common occurence these days) he or she must commute. At the regional level, most pilots can't afford a hotel room and must settle for a crashpad. No studies need to be done to know that the quality of rest at a crashpad is nowhere near as good as a hotel room. Some pilots can't even afford a crashpad and resort to staying in the crew room. Are these pilots Safe?
I thought we were in the regionals forum...no? Anywho, you brought up age 65 (I suspect in a lame attempt to divert attention away from the topic) And for the record, you said, "Age 65 has also stopped the turnover at regionals". Stopped? FALSE. Pilots are still leaving the airline industry regardless of Age 65 (Due to lack of pay and benefits). Replacing an experienced line pilot with a newbie...do you honestly think this is making the industry safer? [/quote
We are talking about a union that represents pilots at the regionals, majors, cargo, etc. And why would we be restricted to solely talking about just regionals just because we are in the regionals forum. But I will concede that I used the wrong term. It didn't stop attrition but it sure hasn't helped it though.
Because safety comes after pay and benefits. If you can't address the first two issues, you're going to have a problem retaining talent. In effect...making the industry (not the act of piloting, mind you) less safe.
Again, we disagree on where safety comes. The reason why people complain about pay (not that they are wrong by doing so) is because they don't have the need to complain about safety. If you can't make it safe, you are going to have problems retaining pilots because of their untimely death in an aircraft accident.
Nevets, I'll concede that ALPA has assisted in making the act of piloting safer. As far as making the industry safer? I have conclusively proven that due to ALPA's incompetence, the industry is less safe. You do, however, exemplify the typical disconnect between ALPA and the pilots. Pilots need better pay and benefits...and ALPA is too busy working on side issues.
And by making piloting safer it has made the industry, profession, hobby, whatever else you want to call it, safer because it involves piloting.
Maybe it will take a few more cases like AAA before ALPA catches on.
No one said ALPA is perfect.
ALPA has had their hand in safety....seeing they can't do anything else.
But they're not the sole party. I'd like to think about all the lessons we've learned from other accidents and pilots. Or how about the advancement in technology? Let me guess, it was an ALPA engineer who designed all this new technology.
The list is long, but ALPA's is short. Sully has done more for this industry by himself, than ALPA has done in the last 75yrs.
ALPA just likes to take credit for others work.
I didn't try to make it seem as though this profession is safe only because of ALPA. I've tried to say many times that with the help of ALPA, this profession is safer.
I didn't try to make it seem as though this profession is safe only because of ALPA. I've tried to say many times that with the help of ALPA, this profession is safer.
While simultaneously taking measures to protect the pay (if not raising it) of the ALPA officers.They do a good job agreeing with pay cuts.
Again, that's very debatable. Lot's of things need to be fixed, very important things, such as rest, duty, and pay. Sure, ALPA has been working on all of those things for a while, but have yet to pull the trigger and get any of them changed.
Well, except for pay. They do a good job agreeing with pay cuts.
I am not what you'd consider a huge ALPA fan but your history recall is flawed. ALPA is what instituted many of the beginnings of the rest rules you see today.
ALPA has had their hand in safety....seeing they can't do anything else.
But they're not the sole party. I'd like to think about all the lessons we've learned from other accidents and pilots. Or how about the advancement in technology? Let me guess, it was an ALPA engineer who designed all this new technology.
The list is long, but ALPA's is short.
easy to say... impossible to back up..Sully has done more for this industry by himself, than ALPA has done in the last 75yrs.
your claim... back it up....ALPA just likes to take credit for others work.
Jsut as you've agreed on them. ALPA doesn't get to vote on congressional legislation or FAA policy... that would be for congress and the FAA.How is it flawed? ALPA has been working on rest rules ever since my relatives started flying in the 1960's.
They agreed on those rules,
on this you are correct... so why put the onus on ALPA any more than yourself.and now they're only making progress on new rules because Congress is pushing for it. Otherwise ALPA has no power to push across a new set of rules, otherwise they would have done it years ago.
no the RLA is the Fed.ALPA is also RLA....which is completely outdated.
Undeniable. How many times has Prater been invited onto News Networks and TV Shows to voice the plight of the industry and inform the flying public?Sully has done more for this industry by himself, than ALPA has done in the last 75yrs.