RJDC 05-10-07 Industry Update

[acarpe3448]

Cool! So youi guys are ready to drop the monetary damages part? It's all about "representation"...right?

Let's hear it!

Sure they will drop the monetary damages claim as soon as it is decided that all scope is droped and Comair can add 737s, 757s, 767s to their fleet. They would also drop their monetary claims if they are allowed date of hire senority integration with Delta! Hey Captain Ford do you know how stupid you look carrying this failed attempt on?

 

[braveheart]

Sure they will drop the monetary damages claim as soon as it is decided that all scope is droped and Comair can add 737s, 757s, 767s to their fleet. They would also drop their monetary claims if they are allowed date of hire senority integration with Delta! Hey Captain Ford do you know how stupid you look carrying this failed attempt on?

Acarpe,

Did you know that prior to 9/11, ALPA was warned that its mainline bargaining practices were fundamentally flawed and would prove harmful to "mainline" and "regional" pilots alike?

These warnings went unheeded and less than a year later thousands of ALPA pilots lost their jobs while non-ALPA and non-union alter ego carriers proliferated. Worse, ALPA continues to bargain and sell its members the same contractual provisions it knows won't work.

Yet, certain uninformed members would rather accept ALPA's vitriolic rhetoric than implement reforms. Until that attitude changes, there's little hope that ALPA can recoup its losses.

http://www.rjdefense.com/bsicsub.pdf
http://www.rjdefense.com/2003/10_Things_About_Scope.pdf

 

[PCL_128]

PCL,

Confidentiality agreements cannot be used as an excuse for knowingly disseminating false information nor as a pretext for violating the union's duties to its members. While confidentiality agreements may limit the sharing of certain information, they do not dictate the union's conduct or permit official misconduct.

Captain Beebe neither distributed false information, nor took part in any official misconduct.

The suggestion that the ALPA Vice President wasn't certain about the information is disproved by his own attempt to use that very same information as an excuse for not acting upon the lawful objections of the ALG and PDT pilots. According to the transcripts, the question was why didn't ALPA act upon the objections of the PDT and ALG MEC's to J4J? The answer was (incredibly) that there wasn't any reason because ALPA knew the jets wouldn't be going to those carriers. See: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/beebe_xscript.pdf

Here's the actual testimony:

Haber: You were aware, were you not, that no RJs were going to go to Allegheny or Piedmont?

Beebe: That was not an absolute. The company was weighing many different options at that point...It might be fairer to say that, the company was weighing all of their options at this point, but it didn't look as though they were placing small jets at Allegheny.

Haber (referring to possibly coming to a J4J agreement): If they had come to an agreement, would they have gotten jets?

Beebe: Perhaps they would. Perhaps things would have changed. I don't know the answer to that.


Seems to me that Captain Beebe had no absolute certainty that jets would not go to either of the WO feeders. He had an educated guess that was based on confidential information that he couldn't share with the other MECs, but no certain information. In other words, he did nothing wrong.

As for ALPA's letter to the Mesaba pilots defending ALPA's diversion of small jets to other alter ego carriers, here's the link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2004/msa_hotline_102704.pdf

Thanks for posting a link. I'd nearly forgotten about that episode. Regardless, I agree with Captain Wychor's statements in the letter.

Nonetheless, your post illustrates the point that ALPA's ill-advised efforts to defend its conduct (rather than implementing reforms) seriously undermines its ability to bring other pilot groups into ALPA.

Imagine how much easier the SkyWest and Colgan drives would be if ALPA could say, "Yes we were wrong, but here's the safeguards we've put in place to ensure it can't happen again."

Honestly, I do a lot of organizing work, and I can't say that any pilot has ever asked me about any of the convoluted things that you and your buddy Joe Merchant (and his older girlfriend) always bring up on this board. Pilots in organizing drives are much more concerned about what their dues will be, seniority integrations (in relation to the Colgan and Skywest drives), how the voting process will work, etc... The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Honestly, I do a lot of organizing work, and I can't say that any pilot has ever asked me about any of the convoluted things that you and your buddy Joe Merchant (and his older girlfriend) always bring up on this board. Pilots in organizing drives are much more concerned about what their dues will be, seniority integrations (in relation to the Colgan and Skywest drives), how the voting process will work, etc... The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd.

Then you must not read the questions that are submitted by Skywest pilots to the organizing committee. Here is an actual question from a Skywest pilot to the OC.... are you telling me you never saw this question or this answer from the OC?


Ask SkyWestALPA (In ALPA's own words)

Submit a question to Ask SkyWestALPA​

Question:The website: www.rjdefense.com, doesn't give ALPA many accolades for their attention to the needs to regional pilots in light of their major partners. How can we be assured our interests will be protected in regard to the scope clauses, etc. promoted by ALPA to their major airline pilots to settle their contracts, which then ultimately influence us?

Answer:Short answer is that this is small group of pilots that have been working for change in ALPA for many years now. ALPA is imperfect and these pilots have the right to pursue change in ALPA because of the democratic structure of the union.

The conclusion that ALPA does not give much attention to the regional carriers fails to give weight to the fact that the Comair pilots got millions in strirke funds in 2000 during their time of great need. Also regional carriers represented by ALPA now have a huge voice in the Association and with growing numbers will have an even bigger voice in the future.

ALPA Safety has been mainly focused on regional carriers for the last ten years to help make improvements in pilot training, and equipment flown by regional carriers. ALPA's infuence and support in the area of Safety has benefitted the regionals both indirectly and directly over the years.

So could some things be improved, yes, but remember the influence of ALPA is the very reason that we enjoy many of the features we have at SkyWest in our pay and work rules. Wouldn't it be nice to have all of what we have worked for over the years protected by a binding contract?

 

[PCL_128]

Then you must not read the questions that are submitted by Skywest pilots to the organizing committee. Here is an actual question from a Skywest pilot to the OC.... are you telling me you never saw this question or this answer from the OC?

No, I haven't seen that question or answer, and your link isn't working. I don't doubt your claim, however. If a pilot has indeed asked that question, then it's extremely rare. As I stated, I have yet to be asked anything in reference to the RJDC at a Skywest or Colgan event.

 

[JoeMerchant]

No, I haven't seen that question or answer, and your link isn't working. I don't doubt your claim, however. If a pilot has indeed asked that question, then it's extremely rare. As I stated, I have yet to be asked anything in reference to the RJDC at a Skywest or Colgan event.

It came right off the Skywest organizing website.... go have a look.... even the OC tapdanced around the answer. They didn't exactly defend ALPA on this issue as much as you do....

 

[PCL_128]

It came right off the Skywest organizing website.... go have a look....

I tried, but I can't get the website to work tonight for some reason. Keeps telling me that the site can't be found.

even the OC tapdanced around the answer. They didn't exactly defend ALPA on this issue as much as you do....

I'm not a member of the Skywest OC, so I don't answer for them. They are free to tell the Skywest pilots whatever they feel is appropriate. If I was asked this question at a Skywest event, I can guarantee you that I wouldn't be nearly as gracious towards the RJDC as the OC apparently was in this answer.

 

[JoeMerchant]

I'm not a member of the Skywest OC, so I don't answer for them. They are free to tell the Skywest pilots whatever they feel is appropriate. If I was asked this question at a Skywest event, I can guarantee you that I wouldn't be nearly as gracious towards the RJDC as the OC apparently was in this answer.

Most regional pilots understand there is a conflict of interest within ALPA.... you are blinded by the ALPA aura.... your approach isn't going to get more regional members on board..... in fact ALPA is going to be doing good if it keeps what it has......

 

[braveheart]

"Captain Beebe neither distributed false information, nor took part in any official misconduct."

"Seems to me that Captain Beebe had no absolute certainty that jets would not go to either of the WO feeders."

"The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd."

PCL,

Thank you for illustrating my point. As a purported ALPA organizer, you defend the indefensible and while failing to tell the whole story. More importantly, the whole tenor of your response suggests to non-members that the union is unwilling to address these questions in a direct and forthright manner:

(1) In the transcripts, Captain Beebe states:

"In fact though in my discussions with management, there was never to be the placement of jets at Allegheny. Allegheny was to remain as a turbo prop carrier."

In a follow-up question, Captain Beebe goes on to say:

"Because I told you that the discussions we were having, were indicative that neither Piedmont nor Allegheny were going to get jets."

(2) Captain Beebe admits that he attended a meeting with Captain Woerth and the objecting PDT and ALG MEC's, yet he withheld the pertinent information:

Question: "Didn't Captain Woerth host a meeting or more than one meeting, concerning issues raised here a meeting that I believe you attended at least one of?"
Answer: "I attended one meeting and I can't recall if it was just with some of the MEC chairmen of the wholly owns or Captain Woerth was there or not."
Question: So why --
Answer: "I didn't disclose that to them at the time. That was information being held closely by the company."

(3) You say as an ALPA organizer "The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd."

You overlook the fact that as you make such a claim, ALPA's SkyWest organizers are fielding questions about the RJDC on the official SkyWest organizing web site (see the re-prints in this same thread.) Likewise, you overlook the fact in the failed drives at Colgan and Chicago Express, ALPA's own organizers downloaded and distributed materials from the RJDC's web site.

If ALPA's conduct isn't an issue, why would ALPA's organizers see the need to field questions about the RJDC on its official organizing web site(s) and quote from the RJDC's materials?

(4) Finally you overlook the point that ALPA is 0-4 in "small jet" organizing drives and that it now has postponed calling for another vote at SkyWest. It must be pointed out that any assertion that you or the folks in D.C. are attuned to the concerns of the SkyWest and Colgan pilots is not being reflected at the ballot box.

So to recap, if ALPA is expected to win organizing votes, it cannot continue to ignore the issue of its own unfair conduct and it must demonstrate credible reforms.

 

[PCL_128]

More importantly, the whole tenor of your response suggests to non-members that the union is unwilling to address these questions in a direct and forthright manner:

We're more than happy to address the concerns in the proper forum. A courtroom is not the proper forum. You had the opportunity to voice your concerns on multiple occasions, and you even had the opportunity to speak with the BSIC on at least one occasion. Suffice it to say that no one was very impressed with you or your cohorts, and your claims had no evidence to back them up.

(1) In the transcripts, Captain Beebe states:

"In fact though in my discussions with management, there was never to be the placement of jets at Allegheny. Allegheny was to remain as a turbo prop carrier."

In a follow-up question, Captain Beebe goes on to say:

"Because I told you that the discussions we were having, were indicative that neither Piedmont nor Allegheny were going to get jets."

(2) Captain Beebe admits that he attended a meeting with Captain Woerth and the objecting PDT and ALG MEC's, yet he withheld the pertinent information:

Question: "Didn't Captain Woerth host a meeting or more than one meeting, concerning issues raised here a meeting that I believe you attended at least one of?"
Answer: "I attended one meeting and I can't recall if it was just with some of the MEC chairmen of the wholly owns or Captain Woerth was there or not."
Question: So why --
Answer: "I didn't disclose that to them at the time. That was information being held closely by the company."

We've both posted several quotations from the depositions, but the true context of everything can be seen by reading the entire deposition. I urge everyone to read these documents. If you read them in their entirety, it becomes quite clear that Dan's claims of impropriety are ridiculous.

(3) You say as an ALPA organizer "The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd."

You overlook the fact that as you make such a claim, ALPA's SkyWest organizers are fielding questions about the RJDC on the official SkyWest organizing web site (see the re-prints in this same thread.) Likewise, you overlook the fact in the failed drives at Colgan and Chicago Express, ALPA's own organizers downloaded and distributed materials from the RJDC's web site.

If ALPA's conduct isn't an issue, why would ALPA's organizers see the need to field questions about the RJDC on its official organizing web site(s) and quote from the RJDC's materials?

Again, I personally have not received a single question in relation to the RJDC on any organizing event at either Colgan or Skywest, and I've talked with hundreds of pilots. If a Skywest pilot emailed this question, then he's a rarity. Most pilots have more important questions on their minds.

(4) Finally you overlook the point that ALPA is 0-4 in "small jet" organizing drives and that it now has postponed calling for another vote at SkyWest. It must be pointed out that any assertion that you or the folks in D.C. are attuned to the concerns of the SkyWest and Colgan pilots is not being reflected at the ballot box.

You have to look at each drive individually. The Colgan drive has been unbelievably successful so far. In just a few weeks, we have already collected far more cards than are required to petition for a vote. The ALPA staff has been very pleased with our progress, and I expect that we'll have received our goal on the cards within a few short weeks. Skywest hasn't gone nearly as quickly, but we're still making progress. I'm hoping that we'll be able to petition for a vote early this fall. We already have well over the minimum number of cards, but we like to have a strong majority. Not to mention that the Capital Cargo pilots have just merged with ALPA, the Evergreen pilots have stated their intent to merge with us, and the JetBlue pilots have had several meetings in Herndon to get the organizing process started. Other efforts are also underway. I think we'll see our membership roster grow considerably in the next few years.

 

[braveheart]

A courtroom is not the proper forum.

You overlook the fact that numerous ALPA VP's and Mainline MEC Chairman have sued ALPA (and won) when their rights were violated.

"You had the opportunity to voice your concerns on multiple occasions, and you even had the opportunity to speak with the BSIC on at least one occasion. Suffice it to say that no one was very impressed with you or your cohorts, and your claims had no evidence to back them up."

You overlook that BSIC members have stated under oath that they are "unfamiliar" with plaintiffs' claims. Therefore, you cannot say with any crediblity that the BSIC responded to the plaintiffs' concerns.

"...but the true context of everything can be seen by reading the entire deposition.

The transcripts are full of lawyer-directed statements where ALPA's officials deny knowledge of, or "can't recall" anything of relevance. There's little doubt that both ALPA's members and non-members can draw their own conclusions concerning ALPA's credibility.

You have to look at each drive individually.

I do. SkyWest #1= FAILED, Colgan= #1 FAILED, Chicago Express= FAILED, GoJet= FAILED, SkyWest #2 (in-house supported by ALPA)= FAILED. SkyWest #3= STALLED.

I personally have not received a single question in relation to the RJDC on any organizing event at either Colgan or Skywest

The actions of ALPA's other organizers indicates otherwise.

Per my reply to your other thread, your vitriolic attacks on reform-minded ALPA members is incompatable with your status as an ALPA organizer and harmful to any organizing drive.

You should consider the possibility that ALPA's opponents will download your inflammatory posts in order to demonstrate the contrasts between what ALPA says in SLC and what its organizers do elsewhere.

 

[PCL_128]

You overlook the fact that numerous ALPA VP's and Mainline MEC Chairman have sued ALPA (and won) when their rights were violated.

I don't overlook it. I just don't consider it to be an appropriate way to deal with things. Lawsuits never lead to reform. They only waste time and resources.

You overlook that BSIC members have stated under oath that they are "unfamiliar" with plaintiffs' claims. Therefore, you cannot say with any crediblity that the BSIC responded to the plaintiffs' concerns.

I believe that their testimony stated that they are unfamiliar with the specific claims in the suit, but they did recall your meeting with them. Do you deny that you met with the BSIC and had an opportunity to make a presentation to them? Not many members have an opportunity to have their personal pet complaint heard before a national committee.

The transcripts are full of lawyer-directed statements where ALPA's officials deny knowledge of, or "can't recall" anything of relevance. There's little doubt that both ALPA's members and non-members can draw their own conclusions concerning ALPA's credibility.

ALPA's attorneys barely spoke during the depositions (in stark contrast to Haber's constant interrupting and badgering). I do agree, however, that the membership can clearly draw the right conclusion from the depositions. It's blatantly obvious that your claims have no merit.

I do. SkyWest #1= FAILED, Colgan= #1 FAILED, Chicago Express= FAILED, GoJet= FAILED, SkyWest #2 (in-house supported by ALPA)= FAILED. SkyWest #3= STALLED.

Corrections: there was no earlier Colgan drive. There were low level talks, but no official drive. GoJet? No drive ever took place. Skywest stalled? Hardly. The drive continues and there will likely be a vote this fall.

The actions of ALPA's other organizers indicates otherwise.

You see a single question on the website and assume that this a widespread concern? Keep dreaming. The average Skywest pilot doesn't even know who you or the RJDC are.

Per my reply to your other thread, your vitriolic attacks on reform-minded ALPA members is incompatable with your status as an ALPA organizer and harmful to any organizing drive.

And as I stated on that other thread, I don't consider you to be a reformer. I look forward to you proving me wrong on that. Here's a suggestion: drop the dang lawsuit before you destroy all of our careers!

Seriously though, there's no vitriol coming from me. I use a lot of sarcasm and hyperbole on these boards for entertainment value, but I'd have no problem sitting down with you and having a friendly conversation about this topic or any other topic. I've made the same offer to John B. and Fins. I have no hatred towards you or anyone else involved with the RJDC. I do strongly disagree with you, but there's no vitriol here.

 

[braveheart]

"Lawsuits never lead to reform. They only waste time and resources."

Which landmark court cases protecting the rights of union members do you think were a waste of time?

I believe that their testimony stated that they are unfamiliar with the specific claims in the suit, but they did recall your meeting with them.

The transcripts show that the BSIC members were not only "unfamiliar" with the specifics of the litigation, but they claimed to be "unaware" of the details of ALPA's current scope clauses and "unaware" of ALPA's bargaining proposals. How anyone can say that the BSIC afforded redress when there was so much that they were "unaware" of defies logic.

ALPA's attorneys barely spoke during the depositions

I said "lawyer directed." That includes instructions given by counsel prior to testimony.

Corrections: there was no earlier Colgan drive. There were low level talks, but no official drive. GoJet? No drive ever took place. Skywest stalled? Hardly.

First, I stand corrected on Colgan, I should have said "Commute Air"= FAILED (NMB Case No. 6944)

Second, at GoJet, ALPA sought a NMB single carrier petition in order to forestall a union vote at GoJet (won by the Teamsters.) Ironically, the NMB cited American's 50-seat scope limits as further proof of "separation" between Trans States and GoJet.

Third, do you work for the Bush administration? As the latest SkyWest drive approaches the two-year point, and after a highly publicized "surge"; ALPA has delayed calling for the SkyWest vote citing the need for a "wider margin." I think "stalled" is an accurate term and the situation should be a concern for all ALPA pilots.

You see a single question on the website and assume that this a widespread concern?

Which of ALPA's three organizing web sites are you talking about, SkyWest's, Commutair's, or Chicago Express? All have attempted to address issues raised by the RJDC. Why? Because no one was interested?

I'd have no problem sitting down with you and having a friendly conversation about this topic or any other topic.

OK, I'll take you at your word. For a start, I'll append the link to the RJDC's publication entitled "10-Things Every Airline Pilot Needs to Know About Scope."

Please look through it (not tonight as its already 1 AM) and share your thoughts on how it can be construed as being "anti-scope" or potentially harmful to ALPA's members.

If you wish, feel free to post your thoughts in a new thread as this one's getting a bit long.

http://www.rjdefense.com/2003/10_Things_About_Scope.pdf

 

[FDJ2]

Acarpe,

Did you know that prior to 9/11, ALPA was warned that its mainline bargaining practices were fundamentally flawed and would prove harmful to "mainline" and "regional" pilots alike? /quote]

Dan, do you know that the CMR MEC Chairman has stated in a sworn deposition, that the CMR pilots were not harmed by DAL scope? Look it up, it's in your own website.

 

[~~~^~~~]

FDJ2: Yes we know Lawson said. By the way, his paycheck says "ALPA" on it. Also, the Delta pilots did vote to undermine their own scope, working with management to keep the RJ deliveries more or less on schedule. I don't know the context of Lawson's response - but how can any of us argue with history? Just look around.

Once the Delta pilots sent the 49% of flying out of mainline, other ALPA members should have scoped that flying at ASA and Comair. Delta, ASA and Comair were all three in negotiations at the time and were all owned by the same Company doing the same branded flying. ALPA blocked the ASA and Comair pilots from having any scope over the flying they performed. Worse, ALPA worked with management to facilitate sending that flying out to the lowest bidder and took "bargaining credits" for the sale of flying being performed by another ALPA group.

The SkyWest, RAH, and many others are enjoying the fruits of ALPA's representational failure. Why would they join ALPA when they can sit on the sidelines and enjoy the growth that has resulted from ALPA's destruction of their members' carriers?