Delta Pilots Association
11-10-2010, 05:32 AM
#2392
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
DAL88;
I agree with many of your items. The pro con papers are a great idea but they need to be done correctly. The cannot be rants, but fact based. I have had an education on these by some of the former authors. It is important to know what works and what does not, but I do agree that they need to be done. They have to talk about the same items and issues and cannot just be papers written from the hip. That goes for both pro and con.
I do not mind reps telling me why they voted for it and why they think the TA of this or that is a good deal. I do agree that selling something over and above this should be toned down. Let your reasoning be your argument.
I agree with many of your items. The pro con papers are a great idea but they need to be done correctly. The cannot be rants, but fact based. I have had an education on these by some of the former authors. It is important to know what works and what does not, but I do agree that they need to be done. They have to talk about the same items and issues and cannot just be papers written from the hip. That goes for both pro and con.
I do not mind reps telling me why they voted for it and why they think the TA of this or that is a good deal. I do agree that selling something over and above this should be toned down. Let your reasoning be your argument.
I have talked to a bunch of guys that voted yes on LOA 46 and 51 and well as LOA 19/JPWA and asked them what lead them to their votes. Not one of them mentioned fear mongering even after I asked if they though the "fear" card was played and whether or not it effected them. Most just understood on some level where they and the company were.
I will state that if the company keeps making tons of money, many of these guys are going to demand a lot of it back too. Fact is that most of the guys feel the company cannot afford restoration. No fear mongering is needed for them to come to that conclusion. The just read the 10K.
This is not my opinion but that of the guys and gals I fly with. Many do not see the company in a position to afford a 2-3 billion dollar per year bump in our compensation unless others follow suit.
This is not my opinion but that of the guys and gals I fly with. Many do not see the company in a position to afford a 2-3 billion dollar per year bump in our compensation unless others follow suit.
Like I have said, if you want to change that, DPA is not going to do it. It needs to be done by education and a heck of a lot of work by each and every pilot that wants guys to understand what you demand ALPA does not get. Again, it is not ALPA that you need to change, it is the majority position of the pilots.
Last edited by DAL 88 Driver; 11-10-2010 at 05:39 AM. Reason: added content
11-10-2010, 05:35 AM
#2393
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
I must ask...is this not exactly what buying a 4 year degree does? Allow someone with the money to "buy" their way into the profession? What about the person who may have amazing skills and can only afford a 2 year degree?
With all respect, the issue is not what they have proposed in public...it's what they are doing behind the closed doors.
My perspective is a bit different. I am a product of one of those schools from many years ago. I also spent two years on the staff as an instructor and check airman. When I left for my first commuter job (that phrase ought to date me)...in a Navajo...I had over 1800 hours. And while technically proficient and had very good stick skills thanks to a very sound program, I was in no manner ready to step into a jet.
The learning curve was steep and I was fortunate to quickly move up to turboprops and later jets. I also have been seen many who came up the same way who were not anywhere near as ready as I was. I say that having had them as my First Officers in the then booming regional industry.
My late father, ex-USAF pilot and I had many discussions. While I agreed a 4 year degree was important...and for decades the argument was that "it showed perseverence."
My argument has always been that while it may show perseverence, it means nothing when the screens go blank, the weather is at minimums and #1 is shut down. You MUST have the experience and the maturity to handle the airplane.
500 hours and a four year degree doesn't do it.
As far as "killing organizations?" I'm unwilling to aprticipate in a process that reduces skill levels and safety to protect any organization. They instead should step up or step back. I'm curious what those organizations may be. Moreover, I wonder why we are equating the safety of the traveling public and our fellow employees to any organization that may not survive because we as pilots demand a higher level of safety.
Here's a slogan we could use...
"One Level of Safety"
With all respect, the issue is not what they have proposed in public...it's what they are doing behind the closed doors.
My perspective is a bit different. I am a product of one of those schools from many years ago. I also spent two years on the staff as an instructor and check airman. When I left for my first commuter job (that phrase ought to date me)...in a Navajo...I had over 1800 hours. And while technically proficient and had very good stick skills thanks to a very sound program, I was in no manner ready to step into a jet.
The learning curve was steep and I was fortunate to quickly move up to turboprops and later jets. I also have been seen many who came up the same way who were not anywhere near as ready as I was. I say that having had them as my First Officers in the then booming regional industry.
My late father, ex-USAF pilot and I had many discussions. While I agreed a 4 year degree was important...and for decades the argument was that "it showed perseverence."
My argument has always been that while it may show perseverence, it means nothing when the screens go blank, the weather is at minimums and #1 is shut down. You MUST have the experience and the maturity to handle the airplane.
500 hours and a four year degree doesn't do it.
As far as "killing organizations?" I'm unwilling to aprticipate in a process that reduces skill levels and safety to protect any organization. They instead should step up or step back. I'm curious what those organizations may be. Moreover, I wonder why we are equating the safety of the traveling public and our fellow employees to any organization that may not survive because we as pilots demand a higher level of safety.
Here's a slogan we could use...
"One Level of Safety"
A few years ago I had a Skywest new-hire pilot on the jumpseat. During the flight he was studying some Skywest provided material. I looked over my shoulder and glanced at the material and was stunned at how basic the information was. It was stuff I learned pre-solo in the T-37.
The existing standards for newhire pilots, at least at Skywest, are ridiculously low.
The concept that someone with such limited knowledge and experience is flying passengers is downright frightening.
I do not believe there should be a significant reduction from the 1,500 hour minimum for graduates of any program.
11-10-2010, 05:42 AM
#2394
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: No to large RJs
Posts: 369
I do not know about you guys but there are some things I will vote No for. Scope sales is one of them.
Even if you change the association the same pilots will be voting. The change desired needs to come from a change of the hearts and minds of the rank and file pilot. A association change does not guarantee that.
Even if you change the association the same pilots will be voting. The change desired needs to come from a change of the hearts and minds of the rank and file pilot. A association change does not guarantee that.
11-10-2010, 06:06 AM
#2395
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Because I do not blame alpa national for the scope sales. I blame pilots selling the bottom of their list to save the top end FAE under a DB plan. Now that that is gone the motivation is too. There have been no scope sales since the DB plans were either frozen or terminated.
Our direction is ultimately what directs our reps and then the MEC Administration and the Negotiating Committee.
Our direction is ultimately what directs our reps and then the MEC Administration and the Negotiating Committee.
11-10-2010, 06:11 AM
#2396
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 134
Pilot Union Changing
I think what we are seeing here is a realization of a shift in how pilots will be represented moving forward. Look at ALPA. Around 38 airlines represented and only 2 are major airlines. Delta and United. Fedex is also ALPA but can easily be seen as being in a different industry.
Looking at my crystal ball I see ALPA representing ONLY regional airlines. And here's the thing....THATS OK. The regional airlines need someone to represent them, and help increase their quality of life.
The majors, now SWA, USAIR, UAL, DAL, AMR will likely all have independent unions that use CAPA to have a voice and lobby in Washington.
Once DAL leaves ALPA you will see the new UAL bolt about a second afterwards as they find themselves funding, as well as surrounded by, regionals.
My DPA card is in for a number of reasons. And I used to be an ALPA rep actually!!
1. I'm not going to fund airlines that actively try and steal my flying.
2. I'm not going to fund a union that has no ballz and cannot take a position on anything.
3. I'm not going to fund Airtran pilots trying to get a better position within SWA only to leave ALPA and join SWAPA. I pay for this sh@t EVERY MONTH OUT OF MYYYYYY PAYCHECK.........(sorry AT guys)
Guys seriously.....quit choking the sick horse with pills and just put a bullet in it.
fly2002
Looking at my crystal ball I see ALPA representing ONLY regional airlines. And here's the thing....THATS OK. The regional airlines need someone to represent them, and help increase their quality of life.
The majors, now SWA, USAIR, UAL, DAL, AMR will likely all have independent unions that use CAPA to have a voice and lobby in Washington.
Once DAL leaves ALPA you will see the new UAL bolt about a second afterwards as they find themselves funding, as well as surrounded by, regionals.
My DPA card is in for a number of reasons. And I used to be an ALPA rep actually!!
1. I'm not going to fund airlines that actively try and steal my flying.
2. I'm not going to fund a union that has no ballz and cannot take a position on anything.
3. I'm not going to fund Airtran pilots trying to get a better position within SWA only to leave ALPA and join SWAPA. I pay for this sh@t EVERY MONTH OUT OF MYYYYYY PAYCHECK.........(sorry AT guys)
Guys seriously.....quit choking the sick horse with pills and just put a bullet in it.
fly2002
11-10-2010, 06:41 AM
#2397
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
I think what we are seeing here is a realization of a shift in how pilots will be represented moving forward. Look at ALPA. Around 38 airlines represented and only 2 are major airlines. Delta and United. Fedex is also ALPA but can easily be seen as being in a different industry.
Looking at my crystal ball I see ALPA representing ONLY regional airlines. And here's the thing....THATS OK. The regional airlines need someone to represent them, and help increase their quality of life.
The majors, now SWA, USAIR, UAL, DAL, AMR will likely all have independent unions that use CAPA to have a voice and lobby in Washington.
Once DAL leaves ALPA you will see the new UAL bolt about a second afterwards as they find themselves funding, as well as surrounded by, regionals.
My DPA card is in for a number of reasons. And I used to be an ALPA rep actually!!
1. I'm not going to fund airlines that actively try and steal my flying.
2. I'm not going to fund a union that has no ballz and cannot take a position on anything.
3. I'm not going to fund Airtran pilots trying to get a better position within SWA only to leave ALPA and join SWAPA. I pay for this sh@t EVERY MONTH OUT OF MYYYYYY PAYCHECK.........(sorry AT guys)
Guys seriously.....quit choking the sick horse with pills and just put a bullet in it.
fly2002
Looking at my crystal ball I see ALPA representing ONLY regional airlines. And here's the thing....THATS OK. The regional airlines need someone to represent them, and help increase their quality of life.
The majors, now SWA, USAIR, UAL, DAL, AMR will likely all have independent unions that use CAPA to have a voice and lobby in Washington.
Once DAL leaves ALPA you will see the new UAL bolt about a second afterwards as they find themselves funding, as well as surrounded by, regionals.
My DPA card is in for a number of reasons. And I used to be an ALPA rep actually!!
1. I'm not going to fund airlines that actively try and steal my flying.
2. I'm not going to fund a union that has no ballz and cannot take a position on anything.
3. I'm not going to fund Airtran pilots trying to get a better position within SWA only to leave ALPA and join SWAPA. I pay for this sh@t EVERY MONTH OUT OF MYYYYYY PAYCHECK.........(sorry AT guys)
Guys seriously.....quit choking the sick horse with pills and just put a bullet in it.
fly2002
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
11-10-2010, 06:53 AM
#2398
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Dismayed
Posts: 1,598
Can you not see that ALPA influences the way people vote? You seem to be concerned about scope as much as myself. Why are independent unions stronger on this issue than ALPA carriers? Continental is new to ALPA and already had (50) negotiated prior to becoming ALPA, so you or ALPA can't take credit for them but I know you'll try. Please provide any others to support your argument that the association has nothing to do with the way we vote. Scope has been continually eroded under the advisement and tutelage of ALPA. We have never tightened scope and ALPA currently is not labeling it as a threat, evidenced by the last letter from our Chairman, who is now the national Prez. If scope was not a priority for him here, why would it be at national where he now has to represent the regionals? It seems we may have another RJ sympathizer taking the helm here shortly. I say all this mainly to say, RJ Scope is not important to ALPA. A change doesn't guarantee anything, but doing the same thing over and over again and failing is insanity. If you are for tightening scope, as you say you are, then why on earth would you want to stay with an organization that doesn't even list RJ scope as a threat? IMO, Scope is the # 1 threat.
The point is, they actively discouraged debate and avoided any real questions. Imagine if they had to actually answer some legitimate questions from the electorate. Of course, they could take Pelosi's tact and just refer to it as 'AstroTurf'.
11-10-2010, 07:10 AM
#2399
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
I think what we are seeing here is a realization of a shift in how pilots will be represented moving forward. Look at ALPA. Around 38 airlines represented and only 2 are major airlines. Delta and United. Fedex is also ALPA but can easily be seen as being in a different industry.
Looking at my crystal ball I see ALPA representing ONLY regional airlines. And here's the thing....THATS OK. The regional airlines need someone to represent them, and help increase their quality of life.
The majors, now SWA, USAIR, UAL, DAL, AMR will likely all have independent unions that use CAPA to have a voice and lobby in Washington.
Once DAL leaves ALPA you will see the new UAL bolt about a second afterwards as they find themselves funding, as well as surrounded by, regionals.
My DPA card is in for a number of reasons. And I used to be an ALPA rep actually!!
1. I'm not going to fund airlines that actively try and steal my flying.
2. I'm not going to fund a union that has no ballz and cannot take a position on anything.
3. I'm not going to fund Airtran pilots trying to get a better position within SWA only to leave ALPA and join SWAPA. I pay for this sh@t EVERY MONTH OUT OF MYYYYYY PAYCHECK.........(sorry AT guys)
Guys seriously.....quit choking the sick horse with pills and just put a bullet in it.
fly2002
Looking at my crystal ball I see ALPA representing ONLY regional airlines. And here's the thing....THATS OK. The regional airlines need someone to represent them, and help increase their quality of life.
The majors, now SWA, USAIR, UAL, DAL, AMR will likely all have independent unions that use CAPA to have a voice and lobby in Washington.
Once DAL leaves ALPA you will see the new UAL bolt about a second afterwards as they find themselves funding, as well as surrounded by, regionals.
My DPA card is in for a number of reasons. And I used to be an ALPA rep actually!!
1. I'm not going to fund airlines that actively try and steal my flying.
2. I'm not going to fund a union that has no ballz and cannot take a position on anything.
3. I'm not going to fund Airtran pilots trying to get a better position within SWA only to leave ALPA and join SWAPA. I pay for this sh@t EVERY MONTH OUT OF MYYYYYY PAYCHECK.........(sorry AT guys)
Guys seriously.....quit choking the sick horse with pills and just put a bullet in it.
fly2002
11-10-2010, 07:22 AM
#2400
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: No to large RJs
Posts: 369
Because I do not blame alpa national for the scope sales. I blame pilots selling the bottom of their list to save the top end FAE under a DB plan. Now that that is gone the motivation is too. There have been no scope sales since the DB plans were either frozen or terminated.
Our direction is ultimately what directs our reps and then the MEC Administration and the Negotiating Committee.
Our direction is ultimately what directs our reps and then the MEC Administration and the Negotiating Committee.
Last edited by DAWGS; 11-10-2010 at 07:47 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 10:33 AM
