New In House Union Effort UPU
01-02-2013, 09:23 AM
#22
Peace Love Understanding
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Airbus
Posts: 1,040
Change what? How is calling it something different going to make a different.
If these people think they have a better plan they need to run for ALPA leadership and make the changes. ALPA itself is never the problem. Its always the people.
I just don't see any advantage to this for us. We just lose in our strength in numbers with national issues.
If these people think they have a better plan they need to run for ALPA leadership and make the changes. ALPA itself is never the problem. Its always the people.
I just don't see any advantage to this for us. We just lose in our strength in numbers with national issues.
01-05-2013, 05:45 AM
#23
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Folks who are interested in this issue need to take a look at, and ask their Representatives, to take a look at the Pinnacle Bridge Agreement.
Pinnacle, allegedly with the support of Lee Moak, did a contract directly with Delta management that among other things, modifies Delta's Section 1, locks down the outsourced jets and modifies hiring language to favor Pinnacle pilots over other ALPA members. The Delta MEC was not even told another ALPA group had engaged their management.
It is a horrible precedent when another group can come in and do a deal which excludes your MEC. Our MEC Chairmen need to call a Executive Council, but of course ALPA's attorneys are out in force defending their client. Most Reps do not understand that ALPA attorneys work for ALPA. The ALPA attorney assigned to your MEC still represent ALPA.
We have processes to deal with bargaining that does not comply with our Admin Manual and Constitution and Bylaws. Rather than replacing ALPA, the smart thing to do is to fix it. The Pinnacle Bridge agreement is a good place to start because of the issues that are involved (an autocratic structure which excludes the representation of members).
Pinnacle, allegedly with the support of Lee Moak, did a contract directly with Delta management that among other things, modifies Delta's Section 1, locks down the outsourced jets and modifies hiring language to favor Pinnacle pilots over other ALPA members. The Delta MEC was not even told another ALPA group had engaged their management.
It is a horrible precedent when another group can come in and do a deal which excludes your MEC. Our MEC Chairmen need to call a Executive Council, but of course ALPA's attorneys are out in force defending their client. Most Reps do not understand that ALPA attorneys work for ALPA. The ALPA attorney assigned to your MEC still represent ALPA.
We have processes to deal with bargaining that does not comply with our Admin Manual and Constitution and Bylaws. Rather than replacing ALPA, the smart thing to do is to fix it. The Pinnacle Bridge agreement is a good place to start because of the issues that are involved (an autocratic structure which excludes the representation of members).
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 01-05-2013 at 06:10 AM.
01-06-2013, 08:55 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,860
01-06-2013, 08:59 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,007
[QUOTE=JoePatroni;1324716]
With no member of congress voting against it... I hardly doubt it was pilot greed...... it was a raw deal no doubt... but we pilots were just playahs... the owners knew what they were doing....
With no member of congress voting against it... I hardly doubt it was pilot greed...... it was a raw deal no doubt... but we pilots were just playahs... the owners knew what they were doing....
01-06-2013, 09:05 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,860
[QUOTE=Snarge;1324719]
The whole thing was spearheaded by a SW pilot who has not lost one thin dime to bankruptcy, merger, or any of the other convenient excuses spouted by his clones. It was ALL about greed, look at the people who directly and immediately benefited.
It was a backdoor deal and you are correct, the owners (ALPA and Prater) knew exactly what they were doing. They found a convenient way to circumvent the NPRM process. Prater was talking about changing the age back in 1996.
It was a backdoor deal and you are correct, the owners (ALPA and Prater) knew exactly what they were doing. They found a convenient way to circumvent the NPRM process. Prater was talking about changing the age back in 1996.
01-06-2013, 09:51 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Cub Cap
Posts: 175
Folks who are interested in this issue need to take a look at, and ask their Representatives, to take a look at the Pinnacle Bridge Agreement.
Pinnacle, allegedly with the support of Lee Moak, did a contract directly with Delta management that among other things, modifies Delta's Section 1, locks down the outsourced jets and modifies hiring language to favor Pinnacle pilots over other ALPA members. The Delta MEC was not even told another ALPA group had engaged their management.
It is a horrible precedent when another group can come in and do a deal which excludes your MEC. Our MEC Chairmen need to call a Executive Council, but of course ALPA's attorneys are out in force defending their client. Most Reps do not understand that ALPA attorneys work for ALPA. The ALPA attorney assigned to your MEC still represent ALPA.
We have processes to deal with bargaining that does not comply with our Admin Manual and Constitution and Bylaws. Rather than replacing ALPA, the smart thing to do is to fix it. The Pinnacle Bridge agreement is a good place to start because of the issues that are involved (an autocratic structure which excludes the representation of members).
Pinnacle, allegedly with the support of Lee Moak, did a contract directly with Delta management that among other things, modifies Delta's Section 1, locks down the outsourced jets and modifies hiring language to favor Pinnacle pilots over other ALPA members. The Delta MEC was not even told another ALPA group had engaged their management.
It is a horrible precedent when another group can come in and do a deal which excludes your MEC. Our MEC Chairmen need to call a Executive Council, but of course ALPA's attorneys are out in force defending their client. Most Reps do not understand that ALPA attorneys work for ALPA. The ALPA attorney assigned to your MEC still represent ALPA.
We have processes to deal with bargaining that does not comply with our Admin Manual and Constitution and Bylaws. Rather than replacing ALPA, the smart thing to do is to fix it. The Pinnacle Bridge agreement is a good place to start because of the issues that are involved (an autocratic structure which excludes the representation of members).
If your section one does not actually prohibit these types of negotiation and your management refused to agree to limit them when they signed the contract, then you are relying on the ALPA political machine to give you a satisfactory resolution. That is a difficult process at best since it could benefit one ALPA group against another. The elected representatives implement the rules, they can modify them if they think it benefits the goals of the organization.
Most of us agree that deference to seniority and longevity in the profession is a measure of fairness. We are not willing to leave it to management to churn us to their benefit. In this case, it appear the concept has been maintained that a long time ALPA member should be hired before a 23 year old off the street. So, it is unclear to me, if your angst is because some contract provision or ALPA rule was violated or if a de-facto flow through was implemented without your design and approval. It just may be, that it is because the perceived autonomy of your pilot group met the reality of a national agenda.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
