acl65pilot

That depends. There always is a motivator for the alternate conclusion. Not good or bad, it just is.

Not true, and you know it. First, it is a perceived conflict of interest, and one that agreeably ALPA does little to discredit. As for the lawyers. Frankly, they give legal advice not directives, and there have been many times that a MEC has gone against a lawyers advice. Some within ALPA some outside of ALPA, sometime ALPA Attorneys some times alternate counsel.
The Threat of DFR is always there, but it does not paralyze anyone.

DALPA does not have a position for 2012. Why? Well, have you gotten a poll yet? As for Reps not directly answering questions on what 2012 will entail, that make sense too. Why? Again, how can a rep make a case for anything when the pilots have not been polled.
I do know that all of the reps I talk to have high hopes for 2012. We are in the knowledge phase of Section 6, not in the expectation setting. That will happen after we are all polled. The Reps are just starting to lay out a strategic mindset, therefore thumping our chests is slightly premature.
Again, I know that if I do not get what I want, I vote "no." I constantly tell me reps what I suspect will be the expectation form our group, but I am not upset because they do not respond in agreement. Their job is to tak input, and then give direction.


You could, but my point is this:

DPA is stating basically that we need to fight for Scope and Pay on one hand and then when I ask about their strategic thinking on Foreign Ownership, FTDT, a Transnational Airline, Labor and union/non-union implications, etc, I do not get the type of strategic long range thinking that will allow me to sleep well at night. I want an association that is not just looking at 2012, but the next five to ten threats, and then 10-20 years in the future at what we may see as the landscape of our airline. After exhaustive talks with may of the DALPA/ALPA pilots in the respective positions, I know we have guys that are not just thinking about this, but planning contingencies, and counter actions to a plethora of outcomes. These guys are the de facto subject matter experts, and that is who I want guarding my back.

I do not call that emotional, I call that logical. Saying that National is trying to get DALPA to sell scope or that they refuse to act on something that is actually outside of their scope of control is emotional and fact-less. It is also Libel. Making accusations like that sounds good, but without hard proof, the goal just becomes a game of perception.

Rather B Fishin

I think both sides have resorted to school yard antics but have one question. How does DALALPA asking the chief pilots office to move said DPA members/materials from one area to another in the crewroom compare with actually providing the company with an INDIVIDUALS name and asking for an investigation that in all intensive purposes will lead to disciplinary action? It there really a moral/professional comparison to using management to do DALALPA's wishes (NO DISCIPLINE INVOLVED) as to DPA potentially having a brethren pilot disciplined? Is there a current investigation or disciplinary process involved for the DPA reps in the crewroom?
I would love an answer from DPA. From this fence sitter, this is the antithesis of unionism and something I would not want to be part of.

Rogue24

The reality is that everyone was trying to feel the other side out the first day and a half on the ATL Crew Room week. It took some time and back and forth for everyone to get the ground rules ironed out, but by the time they did, everyone was just fine.

Heck I saw one of the FO reps in ATL offer to buy some of the DPA guys coffee later in the week. They all seemed to be very civil.

By the end of the week, everyone was fine and dandy. Any new event like this is going to take a few days to get all of the miscommunication worked out, and this was no different.

Bucking Bar

One would think ... but that does not seem to be the way it works in practice. Many of the issues before the Reps do require a very high level of expertise. They typically do not trust line pilots to be right on these issues.

scambo1

Waitaminnit;

The rush week in ATL was really like when the Hells Angels met the Pagans. Dont water down the story...there were no tiddlywinks! The coffee purchase had to be so he could shank the guy easier. insert smile emoticon.

acl65pilot

You really want me to answer that?

I say C; A good mix of both. In unionism a good turnover rate is always good. Always mind the will of the pilots, but in the same light, make sure it is not a fools errands without a objective.

In the Republic case, it appears the evidence is there. In some other instances no so much. The end game of course is to recover flying, but even if that is not obtained in this round, the notion of shell corporations to get around pesky contract language is either reaffirmed or squashed. As a result we have a benchmark in which we can build from.

acl65pilot

Honestly, I can back that up. I was in and out of there most of the week, on this pesky domestic four day that had nice long sits. It is almost like it was made just for me.

I also took the initial jitters as each side figuring out what the ground rules were. As these were defined, both side moved on, and let the week progress. I talked briefly to Tim, but he was quite busy. I talked to the guys I know within ALPA, and flew my jet.

By the end of the week, it seemed like everyone was just hanging out like a bunch of dogs on a porch in July.

Bucking Bar

ACL65,

Your concern echos my concern voiced over the last couple of years.

Our MEC found reasons why ASA and Comair flying was not Delta flying. Same with Mid West and Compass. Now my bet is that we will witness the same thing with Delta Private Jets and Republic. Our MEC does not want us to perform small jet flying. They hope we can profit from it.

The huge risk is that schemes that rely on outsourcing to generate unearned profits generally fail when middle man is cut out & they themselves are outsourced. If Delta management will do what they have done to subsidiaries like Comair and Compass, or Mesaba back in the dark days, we have no reason to believe they would not do it to us in a heartbeat.

Delta Private Jets already operates aircraft which FAR EXCEED our scope's weight limits. Our scope is absolutely clear, our union's lack of enforcement is also crystal clear. So what when Delta Private Jets hires a couple of retired 737, A330, A320 and 747 Captains to fly charters? Are we are establishing a "past practice" which dooms future enforcement attempts to failure?

We need the acknowledgement from our MEC that outsourcing is poison. It is a systemic risk to the survival of our pilot list and our association. They've got to stop trading in this crap.

Pineapple Guy

Well, you said it; not me.

Seriously, anyone who would continue to conduct a decertification drive in the middle of Section 6 negotiations is obviously sabotaging any chance of a successful outcome. It's as simple as that.

And to think that the anti-ALPA crowd is willing to do that, speaks volumes.

caddis

This is exactly what the fear of the 2 LEC reps I talked to. There is a feeling that this MEC is a top down organization versus a bottom up. In other words the MEC chairman dictates his position and expects the LEC reps to fall in line.

My concern about ALPA and DALPA are growing on a daily basis.