Surprise

I know! That's what I've been saying about Sully.

tsquare

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that for one minute.

Carl Spackler

NewK would have deflected it with nothing more than a manly stare!

Carl

acl65pilot

That is the misnomer, we do. Meeting and conferring is just that. I lose no sleep about our section one and the results of Ford-Cooksey. Like Bar said, Dan Ford, retired from OH, and there is really no one else left to police it. It is a policy, we comply with it, and will take back scope if that is the will of our pilots.
Frankly, I am more worried about our guys looking the other way wrt scope, when another large pay raise is offered, versus a ALPA regional challenging our exclusivity though DALPA, as the bargaining agent with Delta Air Lines, Inc.


Not true. It that were true, DALPA would not negotiate our contract, the ALPA policy and by law would state that ALPA did, and this language would not read, "Meet and Confer," but "Meet and agree to." Big difference there.

Carl, the junior guys like me that have been termed scope hawks understand the implications of Ford-Cooksey, understand the wording of how it is incorporated in to the Policy Manual, and do not worry about National selling anything. We realize that if we are to recapture or keep scope where it is at, the will has to come from this group with a "No" vote if or when it is offered to our pilots in a MEMRAT vote. If National signed a contract that we voted down, then you may have a point, but until that happens, the blame lies here.

*Spare me the song and dance about scare tactics. I agree that maybe we should not "hard sell" every TA, but in the end we vote for it. What I see wrt to the angst with ALPA is a people issue. Specifically and issue with those that employ the policy and structure of ALPA not the actual structure itself. That is one of the many reasons I have an issue with getting rid of the structure that has served this profession well. If you look at all other "Independent" unions, they all mimic the basic structure.

Carl Spackler

The point that you won't face is that if ALPA intended for locals (like DALPA) to decide what was best for their Section 1's, there would have been no need for any "meeting" or "conferring." Ignore it if you wish, but this is a big red flag.

ALPA and its new president does NOT WANT locals deciding what is in their own Section 1. ALPA believes that Section 1's must be written in a way that is best for the profession. That is a quote from Moak himself.

Carl

Carl Spackler

Again, you miss what our new president just said. He said he considers it ALPA's highest priority in negotiations to use all of ALPA's resources to ensure that contracts are not "selfish", but good for the profession as a whole. DALPA negotiates a contract, but it does so with funding and experts issued by ALPA. An ALPA that believes what Moak stated.

Carl

Carl Spackler

Actually, you don't. Your posts are proving that. But I'm glad you sleep well.

If or when it comes to a MEMRAT vote? Yikes! But sadly, you do have a point there. The next scope give away by DALPA may well come via LOA without MEMRAT. As you know, that would not be against any ALPA or DALPA by-laws.

As I've said many times, it's just sad that our affiliation with ALPA means we have our own union as an opponent in scope negotiations. Our only hope is to stand strong against what our own union will likely negotiate. Or mandate.

Carl

forgot to bid

Newk hit a bird... I mean a flock of birds... a flock of geese... a flock of pterodactyls... all flying in single file... right on the nose cone last year.

As you can see, this is a DC-9 flown by Newk after that event:



Now compare that to an RJ.

Columbia

Ummmmm, I think Newk already has a date tonight. Now back to the "Deliverance" marathon on AMC. Who knew Grumman made canoes?

Boomer

Out of all the possible choices, the MEC picks Mayans and Comair to form the basis of an April Fools joke.

I guess that makes sense.