It's taken seriously, but not as some form of serious journalism. It's a newsletter. Expecting them to have the same fact checking standards as a newspaper or newsmagazine is unrealistic. A pilot was referred by another pilot and had a story that could have easily come from any other pilot. Jan had no reason to doubt it. No reason to make a big deal out of this.
The pilot in question was nominated for and placed in a position representational of ALL ALPA PILOTS.
The pilots that represent us in Union matters are usually voted on- that's because the Union wants accountability of those who REPRESENT our issues.
They held this guy up and shone a spotlight on him and said, "Look at this guy! He's among the best of the best, surely, and represents the high standards to which all ALPA pilots should strive."
... and by doing so without looking into things, just to be sure, they made us all look stupid. If our own representation thinks that's the cat's meow and that's what all of us should be but then puts up the village idiot for the world to see, well, damn it, I expect a little more.
Seriously now. The whole damned internet is having a laugh at pilots' expense. All they had to do was stop and look and make a few phone calls.
Pilots do that, right? Check to make sure things are right before they blaze ahead into things?
ALPA does TONS of good that people never see, and therefore assume isn't actually done. Given that, you'd think that when they wanted to make a splash in the public they'd stop to consider how bad it might look if they botched it, and how important it is towards unity and cooperation when our leadership looks this incompetent.
The individual in question is clearly a liar, and possibly has other problems.
The ALPA staffers were just totally ignorant- because they didn't think to look.
Which is worse, then? A knowing liar or an unknowing incompetent?
I expect better.. from all parties involved.
