Yeah. Don't get me started on taxes etc. If I were going to lose sleep over freeloaders it would definitely involve the tens of thousands of dollars I donate to healthy Americans who soak it up while choosing to watch American Idol on their big screen televisions rather then look for a job. The few thousand I pay to ALPA barely hits my radar screen in comparison.
But there was a period between FPA and agency shop, and I really don't remember vast shifts in membership numbers based on union votes. And I could be wrong, but I don't remember voting on agency shop as a separate issue from our 2006 contract. Weren't they bundled?
I do agree with the earlier post regarding non-members. It is always about the money despite their vehement arguments to the contrary. But then, for most members, it is also about the money, despite their vehement arguments to the contrary. As a die hard capitalist, I don't have a problem with people making independent decisions regarding their money. And I strongly support the idea of businesses (and associations) living or dying based on their ability to convince enough people to voluntarily pay for the product or service they provide.
For me personally, I'd pay all my dues for the services of our SIG alone. I think they do an outstanding job of sorting through an incredibly complex mess of trips to produce a good variety of safe and productive lines. So rather than laying awake at night plotting painful death on all the freeloaders my hard earned dollars support, I selectively imagine my tax dollars are paying the salary of a young soldier serving in Afghanistan, and my ALPA dues pay for the services provided by folks like our hard working SIG members.
Freeloaders and non-members be damned.

Well, in this case you are completely WRONG! In the 2006 contract our union negotiated for agency shop which under the RLA allows a negotiated contract whereby any pilot can be terminated for non payment of union dues. So there is no option to withhold dues (not that I would exercise it anyway).

My point was that if the union could negotiate such a drastic action taken by the company, an action where the company has no interest whether we pay our dues or not, why cannot the union attempt to negotiate something that is in our best interests. Yes, we may have to give something up. But flying DP's is supposed to be a safety issue.

In the end, as many have said on this site, it is all about the money. Flying DP’s just isn’t serious business to our union membership or there would be something in place to discourage it. Collecting money for all members is big bucks. And money talks!

BTW, if this were about fairness, why were all the non-members grandfathered into the agency shop rule? They have never had to pay their share. That was part of the negotiated deal in 2006. So non-members get away without paying, but members who toe the line (DP flyers excepted) are required to pay. No fairness there.

A major disadvantage of agency shop is that the union leadership, local and national, is far less accountable to its members.

The union leadership, both national and local, can do basically whatever they darn well please, without fear of losing funding, but only because of agency shop.

If we didn't have agency shop, many junior union members would have voiced their displeasure with the age 65 debacle by cutting off the money, and perhaps the union might have treated us better. Since we had agency shop, the union told the junior members to pack sand, and got away with it.

Why should we stick with ALPA national, when they don't give a darn about the cargo members?

Why is the cargo cutout still in effect?

Because it is not that important to ALPA national!

They take out money, but don't work for us!

Why don't we get full per diem, at US government rates, updated yearly? I would gladly give my 3% for that one item.

But we won't ever get it, because ALPA national doesn't get their pound of flesh from per diem. We are being ripped off on the order of $10,000 per year, and that is TAX FREE money, because ALPA wouldn't get their 2%!

Before you say "the union is me", that's BS! I have told everyone I can tell that per diem should be our number one item in negotiations. But what do we get? Dimes and nickels! If ALPA really represented the pilots, per diem would be full and updated yearly.

Here's another one...

I asked DW about the (then new) Roth 401K, and if that was a contract priority.

His answer was, no, ALPA does not think that is worth "wasting" negotiating capital. HE WAS WRONG!

The Roth 401K would help many junior pilots make up for the significant losses they have incurred by age 65, and by DW "doing the right thing", translated: screw the junior to protect your buddies.

Bottom line, agency shop does nothing but make the union less accountable to its membership, and "our" union DOES NOT listen to the membership like they should!

per diem has been raised with ALPA CBA's. It is not as simple as you make it sound either. Full government per diem, especially internationally, is a lot of money and the Company would never just "give" us that if we asked. It all comes out of the same pool and would be at the expense of something else. AS long as we have a pension you have to weigh the benefits of getting more tax free money or getting more money that is pensionable earnings. We may very well be best suited to go for tax free money based on the tax structure that we see evolving.

As for the Roth 401K, it is a priority according to our R and I Committee, ask them. It is really just as easy as adding a brokerage account option which we should have as well. If we want to loose our money in stock purchases with our DC money we should be able to do so. :)

Well said.

So what you are saying in a Nut shell is every time ALPA would do something you didn't agree with you would Quit....or Stop paying Dues.

Yeap, that would make us a more effective Union since the majority of us always agree on things..................If this 767 LOA passes I quit I didn't like our recent Bridge Contract, I quit.

Who would win in that type of scenario?.... The Company.

BTW, all the Senior Guys you complain about got hit pretty hard during 4 a 2 b to Keep junior guys on Property.
Yeah they could have stopped paying dues too. That would have benefited the junior guys.

Sorry Niteflyr, I watched for 13 years here how things worked with Voluntary Dues. Guys would quit for every little thing. Pilot managers never paid a Dime. Why do you think we lagged the industry for so long?

Nightflyer makes a good point about our union. Maybe it's about time we give the junior guys some real representation in our union? Perhaps we should allow the junior members of our union, in good standing, to vote on agreements. Maybe even go so far as to allow them to elect their own representatives on our MEC.

I know, crazy talk!!

Yeah, money talks. More members = more resources we have for our negotiators and legal team. We spent a lot of money on the HKG 4 when the company came down on them. I'm glad we spent it and am also glad I didn't have to come up with a special assessment.

Sounds like more money is about to be spent because of our stupid FDA agreement.

You mean the one that is "the best we can get?" The one that had a 32% "no" vote, twice? The one we are now having to spend negotiating capital and legal fees on, just as the 32% said we'd have to? I'm too am glad we spent the money on the HKG pilots. Too bad the other 68% didn't listen years before.

It's not 68%, it's the 20%+ of folks who'd rubber stamp anything and don't actually need to "read" the LOA since it's not going to apply to them anyways.

That being said-FIDO. Forget it, Drive ON.
Edumacate folks better for future votes, accept that occasionally you're working with a bunch of complete idiots who'd vote for something you abhor. Sometimes they show their intelligence by voting for something you'd like.

But if your definition of smart people is simply those people who agree with you....