Carl Spackler

Maybe you've forgotten how this began. Allow me:

As we now all know (including you) pilots don't vote for the MEC chairman. You correctly state not everyone knows how the Delta MEC operates. Clearly you didn't. In the future, you probably shouldn't make statements like this:

When you don't know how things work.

Carl

Carl Spackler

Yet another poor decision. Kitty Hawk, NC would be cheaper and more appropriate. Hell, anywhere would be cheaper. Maybe a small lobbying contingent in DC, but not the whole dang bunch!

Sounds like ALPA isn't very far from it now:

TO: ALPA Executive Board

Ladies and Gentlemen:

It has been nearly a year since I last communicated with you. I know that you are periodically briefed by ALPA management on the relationship between ALPA and Unit 1. As you know only too well, however, the views of management and labor on any issue are rarely the same. I am writing now to provide you with Unit 1's view of the current state of affairs between ALPA and Unit 1, which I think is likely to be more accurate that the self-serving version provided by ALPA management.

When I took over as Unit 1 president in July 2009, ALPA had already RIF'ed or terminated a number of Unit 1 employees, unilaterally discontinued ALPA's merit pay program, declared an impasse in contract negotiations and imposed wage and benefit reductions - all in violation of federal labor law. The conclusion that ALPA acted unlawfully is the view, not just of Unit 1, but also of the NLRB General Counsel, who has issued several unfair labor practice complaints against ALPA.

One of my first actions as president was to meet with Capt. Prater in an effort to get the parties back to the bargaining table. As a result of these efforts, the parties agreed to meet on July 17, 18 and 19. Those negotiations, however, broke off on the morning of July 18th after ALPA gummed up the works. Since then, Unit 1 and ALPA have met three additional times in an effort to reach an agreement, without success. I think that it is important to note that the spring 2009 contract proposal made by Unit 1, if accepted, would have saved ALPA approximately two million dollars.

On August 17, 2010, representatives of ALPA management and representatives of Unit 1 met with officials of the NLRB in Baltimore to ascertain whether the several unfair labor practice cases against ALPA could be settled. If that meeting was not an eye-opening experience for ALPA management, it surely should have been. The NLRB regional attorney explained to the parties that ALPA's liability for its unlawful conduct could well exceed two million dollars. The NLRB also made it clear that it intended to litigate and to hold ALPA accountable for its numerous unfair labor practices. ALPA and Unit 1 agreed to meet in September and to discuss a possible settlement of both the contract and the unfair labor practice case, but if the case is not settled, the trial is scheduled to begin on November 8. It is worth noting that the NLRB, and not Unit 1, will be prosecuting that case. Unit 1 may participate, but its cost will be minimal compared to that incurred by ALPA in defending its conduct.

The unfair labor practice cases filed against ALPA have been consolidated with another unfair labor practice case against ALPA filed by a former ALPA employee. I mention this because that case demonstrates again the arrogance and poor judgment exhibited by ALPA management. That case was filed because Director of Representation Bruce York, while attending a luncheon with Captain Prater and their counterparts at the Teamsters, criticized a former ALPA employee who had been laid off and had taken a job with the Teamsters and then filed a grievance because he had not received all of the severance pay to which he was entitled. After verbally criticizing a Teamsters employee for engaging in activity protected by the NLRA (filing a grievance), Bruce York compounded the mistake by sending the Teamsters an email repeating that criticism. That petty and pointless gesture led to the issuance of yet another unfair labor practice complaint against ALPA. ALPA's defense is the patently ridiculous argument that, in communicating with officials of the Teamsters, York was not acting as ALPA agent or supervisor. Once again, pilot dues money will be spent defending ALPA's arrogant and unlawful conduct.

The arrogance and poor judgment of ALPA management was also on display in its decision to be responsible for the distribution of some $550,000,000 which resulted in a forty-four million dollar settlement of the Mansfield case. ALPA may have claimed that the settlement cost "only" eight million dollars, but the truth is that the settlement will be paid with insurance, loans and dues money, including $500,000 each year for four years to pay off just one of the loans. And, those amounts do not include the litigation costs.

There is a common thread that runs through all of this: arrogance, poor judgment, litigation and liability. Unit 1 is hoping for a different approach - hoping that ALPA management will eventually recognize the wisdom of acting lawfully and dealing fairly with its employees. So far, we have been disappointed, but we are hoping for a change.

Regards,

Don McClure. President
UALPAPAE Unit 1

Thoughts?

Carl

Elmer Fudd

Exactly. They shouldn't have to pay for Legacy screw ups. Nor should a Legacy carrier pay for a Regional's expenses.

You are totally correct. We should have a system that rewards experience. The new hire pilot has a background in pretty extensive flight training. Many written tests, oral exams by the FAA, and a host of aircraft and simulator checkrides. Quite a few medical exams along the way also. Then, off to fly aircraft for several years, some in adverse conditions, before getting hired at an airline. Then they are in charge of flying passengers around, our family & friends.

OTOH, a high school graduate answers a newspaper ad for a "Communications Specialist" position at ALPA. IOW, answering the phone. They, like the new hire pilot, graduated high school, but the ALPA phone person makes more than the new hire. I can't justify that. I guess I just think the pilot is worth more.

I have no beef with the people on the other end of the phone. It is a great service. My point is, that you, as a professional airline pilot, should be paid commensurate with your skills---so should they. The fact that their pay is twice as much as yours is the problem with ALPA NATL. The bureaucracy favors the office worker, rather than raising the pay for the junior pilots. The tail is wagging the dog. YOU are sending YOUR DUES MONEY to pay someone who is not as qualified as you.....more money than you.

ALPA can't effectively represent two groups that are after the same job.

acl65pilot

When a connection carrier successfully gets ALPA to negotiate a contract with Delta Air Lines(Or other ALPA major airline), that binds a major and or DAL not the holding company but Delta Air Lines to this feeders contract (CBA)and calls the flying theirs, I will be concerned. Until then I have not seen a case where a ALPA regional that does contracted lift has 1) Gone for and 2) Successfully bound a major airline to the flying they perform.

Currently that is a function of contracts that one airline and or holding company has with another for flying that is "allowed" by another mainline contract.

ATCsaidDoWhat

Elmer, with due respect, your statement here is misleading and incorrect. I'm not sure where you may have come up with this assumption but I can tell you from the experience I have had with ALPA's hiring, they don't hire HS grads. Their minimum requirements are awfully darned specific and high; minumum Bachelor Degrees with specific experience and usually a couple or three years related experince. And while there was hiring a few years back, since 2004 there have been substantial staff cutbacks and reductions. If you walked through the Herndon offices, you'd see a ghost town of empty offices and a demoralized staff who would walk into the gates of Hell for the pilots they work for. All they ask is to be treated like the valued and experienced employees they are. They have earned their seniority and pay and they don't live high on the hog.

Now managers and VP's? Different story. The difference between the two is like airline management and labor.

Sorry for jumping into y'alls discussion, but it needed some clarification.

Elmer Fudd

I agree. They should be treated with the utmost respect, as should anyone. I was just pointing out that they are in a different job classification than an ALPA pilot.

Someone posted some figures for the Managers, EVPs, etc. on a different web board awhile ago.....it seemed pretty extravagant, to say the least.


No problem, the more the merrier.

iceman49

Before we totally throw it down the drain, we should remember some of the accomplishments...I wonder if the pilot that this article talks about thought his dues were not being used properly. Just a thought.


Exposed Gross Laboratory Testing Misconduct: ALPA vindicated a wrongfully terminated Delta pilot, whose FAA certificates were revoked when the testing laboratory (LabOne) reported his urine sample had creatinine and specific gravity readings at the levels of water, and claimed that he "substituted" his sample. Despite this pilot's 20-year unblemished record and assertion of his innocence, neither the airline nor the FAA gave his claims any credence. ALPA appealed the enforcement action and grieved his firing.

With the help of an expert forensic toxicologist, ALPA counsel investigated LabOne. ALPA attorneys procured boxes of laboratory records and exposed the laboratory's bad testing practices, costing the laboratory director his job. These ALPA efforts, on behalf of the pilot, exposed pervasive and gross laboratory misconduct, including: (1) use of malfunctioning equipment, (2) backdating documents, (3) destroying evidence, (4) using deteriorating controls that caused inaccurate results, (5) failing to comply with applicable standards, and (6) lying under oath by the laboratory director.

ALPA succeeded in getting the pilot reinstated with all back pay and benefits, fully clearing his record with the FAA. Several previously fired Delta flight attendants were also cleared and reinstated.

• Ensured that Nationally Certified Laboratories Meet Regulatory Guidelines: As a result of ALPA's detection of laboratory errors and misconduct in handling validity tests, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ordered an emergency inspection of the national laboratories certified to conduct regulated testing. In that inspection, 40 or more of the 66 laboratories were found in noncompliance with the federal guidelines covering testing procedures. As a result, 300 test results previously reported as "substituted" were ordered canceled by the government.
• Advocated Validity Testing Standards: ALPA sought and achieved stricter regulations governing validity testing and succeeded in getting the criteria for samples reported as "substituted" to be more favorable to employees. In response to rules proposed by DOT in 2000, ALPA submitted extensive comments critiquing the procedures for validity testing, including the cutoff levels for deeming a sample to be "substituted." ALPA vigorously contended that DOT's creatinine cutoff level was not low enough and risked branding innocent individuals who produce ultra-dilute urine as rule violators.

acl65pilot

Ice,
Part of the good dues do that no member ever sees unless the are on the wrong side of the table.

ALPA always gets blasted for the failure because the successes are always kept quiet.

Carl Spackler

It's just the opposite. ALPA's successes are widely touted by ALPA constantly...nothing wrong with that. When it comes to their failures, well, it's generally up to others to point those out because ALPA sure doesn't.

Carl

iceman49

I would like to know the history of the other organizations, I believe APA was formed after a disagreement with the other members of ALPA over who should be the national president. USAPA we all know how that came about, essentially a disagreement with the SLI, the others I have no idea why they chose to become independent.

Additionally I think if we can get 51% to decertify a union, we should also be able to change our own DALPA group to meet our perceived needs.