Alpa Doesn't Look As Good As It Used To

[Firebird2XC]

A few ideas I've been kicking around lately in regard to this:

We need to be able to better demonstrate the need for a union at every 121 carrier.

First off, I think that one of the better ways to do this would be with a comparison chart. People are always comparing regionals, but who ever really sits down and compares work rules? Lining up a few union carriers item by item in a column alongside a non-union carrier or two would be a start. More obvious demonstrations of what some of us take for granted as an obvious choice may help the fence sitters make a decision to support labor movements.


Second is something that concerns me quite a bit. While I by no means state that this applies to all involved at non-union carriers, I suspect that some pilots don't care to be involved in a union for a highly shortsighted reason. I think some pilots believe that by keeping the apparently slow and cumbersome union dealings out of their airline that it frees their company to move in predatory ways against other companies. While competition in business will always exist, non-union employers are creating an environment where unionized companies are less competitive. In the end, the labor group employees are the real losers, all around.

- The root of this problem in this is that when a non-union outfit moves in on a union outfit's business, it usually does so because compensation to labor groups is less, thereby allowing a lower contract bid. I think some pilots view this as acceptable because regional airlines are considered temporary to them and irrelevant to the long-term picture. This is a fallacy because by lowering the bar for pay and compensation at that point, it allows for other to follow suit in order to compete or drive up profit margins. Long term, this will ripple outward to affect ALL 121 carriers, including the major carriers where most pilots hope to spend the duration of their careers.

- The REAL rub in this, in my opinion.. is that with the shifting paradigm in domestic airline travel, many so-called 'regional' airlines will see greater and greater operational expansion over the next decade. 'Major' airline domestic operations will likely shrink. The expanded 'regional domestic' operators will still be operating with the compensation and work rules as mentioned in the previous paragraph. While compensation may be similar based on the size of the aircraft involved, the resulting loss of quality of life will be noticeable. I think many fail to consider this possibility and do little to nothing to combat it.

It's a domino effect, of sorts. Pilots that accept less now and do not strive to improve their company's dealings with labor may well see that what they viewed as a temporary stepping stone is actually a place they'll spend many years.


Solidarity among union pilots is a key ingredient to creating a remedy to trends like this. While controversial, restricting jumpseat access to non-union pilots may become a real issue in the days ahead. I think we should make it a gradual process, however. Rather than simply slam the door shut, we should make it clear that if union negotiated benefits are desired, one should have a union at your company. Non-union pilots should be given a window of time in which to do this. This would allow them fair warning to fully consider what they've so obviously taken for granted over time. If at the end of this window they decide to go without union representation, then access to union related benefits should cease in every possible way.


Remember, however, that priority one is solidarity. I'm not really sure how it would work, but we should all rally to the air of our fellow union pilots at all levels. If, for example, Pinnacle pilots should strike or picket, I think we should look to organize members from other airline union groups to attend and support those events. Management groups believe that we'll all slit each other's collective throat for a nickel. If we don't start backing each other up when it comes down to the essentials (ie, contracts, preventing whipsaws) then all may well be lost.

 

[Velocipede]

A few ideas I've been kicking around lately in regard to this:
Second is something that concerns me quite a bit. While I by no means state that this applies to all involved at non-union carriers, I suspect that some pilots don't care to be involved in a union for a highly shortsighted reason. I think some pilots believe that by keeping the apparently slow and cumbersome union dealings out of their airline that it frees their company to move in predatory ways against other companies. While competition in business will always exist, non-union employers are creating an environment where unionized companies are less competitive. In the end, the labor group employees are the real losers, all around.

Exactly. When jetBlue started out, the pilots were all over aviation and business webboards bragging how they were going to dominate the skies in 5 years and get rich on their stock options. Disgusting.

- The root of this problem in this is that when a non-union outfit moves in on a union outfit's business, it usually does so because compensation to labor groups is less, thereby allowing a lower contract bid. I think some pilots view this as acceptable because regional airlines are considered temporary to them and irrelevant to the long-term picture. This is a fallacy because by lowering the bar for pay and compensation at that point, it allows for other to follow suit in order to compete or drive up profit margins. Long term, this will ripple outward to affect ALL 121 carriers, including the major carriers where most pilots hope to spend the duration of their careers.

Again, exactly correct. Why do you thing USAir and UAL are now paying jetBlue pay rates to their narrowbody Captains? Because the rats flying for jetBlue proved there are plenty of pilots willing to work for those rates.

Why did those carriers use the bankruptcy court to wipe out those pilot pension plans. Again, because jetBlue pilots PROVED you don't need no stinkin' pension plan to get people to fly for you. Now, along come Virgin and Skybus to lower the bar even lower.

It's a domino effect, of sorts. Pilots that accept less now and do not strive to improve their company's dealings with labor may well see that what they viewed as a temporary stepping stone is actually a place they'll spend many years.

And drag the rest of the industry down to their level while they're at it.

Solidarity among union pilots is a key ingredient to creating a remedy to trends like this. While controversial, restricting jumpseat access to non-union pilots may become a real issue in the days ahead. I think we should make it a gradual process, however. Rather than simply slam the door shut, we should make it clear that if union negotiated benefits are desired, one should have a union at your company. Non-union pilots should be given a window of time in which to do this. This would allow them fair warning to fully consider what they've so obviously taken for granted over time. If at the end of this window they decide to go without union representation, then access to union related benefits should cease in every possible way.

The "fair warning" part of your idea is the only one I disagree with. When disciplining children, do you do it gradually? Heck no. You hand out the appropriate punishment immediately so they will learn their lesson. Cut the jumpseat privlege off and do it immediately. You're only helping them destroy the profession we love.

They're a cancer. They need to be cut out. You need not have any fraternal empathy for those who ruthlessly cut your throat. They need to be treated like the pariahs they are. Shunned and cut off from the fraternity of pilots until they demonstrate they are willing to join the fight on our side.

Until then, they're a bunch of management shills and toadys and don't deserve the time of day, much less access to UNION negotiated benefits.
whipsaws) then all may well be lost.[/quote]

 

[flyover]

Want to make sure ALPA never organizes another pilot group again?

Start things like jumpseat wars and do lots and lots of name-calling. Shills, children, cancer, etc etc.

And if you also don't want to solve any problems then don't look at the cause. Whipsaws? They are the result of an ALPA initiative, scope, that has turned out to be the single most anti-union action since deregulation. An initiative which must be defended by continually convincing regional pilots it is in their best interest. And you guys seem to mostly be buying it.

So carry on.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

They are the result of an ALPA initiative, scope, that has turned out to be the single most anti-union action since deregulation. An initiative which must be defended by continually convincing regional pilots it is in their best interest.

Scope is an anti-union action, huh? You're gonna have to explain that one. Scope is the protection of union jobs. Without scope, a contract is worthless. There's a reason that it's always the first section in a contract.

 

[Firebird2XC]

The "fair warning" part of your idea is the only one I disagree with. When disciplining children, do you do it gradually? Heck no. You hand out the appropriate punishment immediately so they will learn their lesson. Cut the jumpseat privlege off and do it immediately. You're only helping them destroy the profession we love.

They're a cancer. They need to be cut out. You need not have any fraternal empathy for those who ruthlessly cut your throat. They need to be treated like the pariahs they are. Shunned and cut off from the fraternity of pilots until they demonstrate they are willing to join the fight on our side.

Until then, they're a bunch of management shills and toadys and don't deserve the time of day, much less access to UNION negotiated benefits.
whipsaws) then all may well be lost.

[/quote]


I stand by my belief in a warning period. Unless we simply make it a choice between one dictatorial mindset or another, we need to give those were simply ignorant or mislead a chance to see their mistake. Guidance or our peers should be an act of firm leadership, not a lynching. If we are quickly heavy-handed or reactionary our entire message may be moot. Treating pilots as you would children in word or deed is also one of the things I warned against seasoned aviators doing. It further widens the divide in the generation gap. Rubbing younger pilots' noses in their inexperience or lack of longevity will immediately set many of them against you. Giving non-union carriers a brief period in which to unionize prior to being blacklisted serves two purposes:

A) It will be a chance to gain an ally rather than a permanent enemy. I agree that yes, some pilot groups may in fact not be ultimately worthy of our ultimate empathy. However, "sending them to the guillotine" as a policy unfairly generalizes a group who are not all the same. Take Colgan Air, for example. Seggy works there. Would you immediately deny him any and all access to jumpseat via blanket policy? If that policy were in place, that might just happen. Would it be warranted in his specific case? Of course not. Punishing all because of the ignorance of their peers inspite of their efforts to educate them would only alienate allies we have in those pilot groups.

Giving a period where pilot groups are allowed to unionize and step up to higher ground allows the pilot groups to talk amongst themselves and be educated on the process. We need stronger policy, not scorched earth. Taking the higher ground is key, here. Otherwise we're no better than those that are only out for themselves- we're just the other end of the spectrum.

B) Denying jumpseats can go both ways. The first time a non-union carrier captain gets denied a jumpseat because of his non-union status, it plants the seeds for him to do the same. I've heard it said many times that a good number of labor-supporting union pilots rely on non-union carrier jumpseats to get to work. Camaraderie among pilots has allowed this to continue thus far. If a jumpseat ban went into effect, those union pilots could be left high and dry. A 'cooling off' period used to let non-union airlines organize themselves not only allows us to achieve the higher moral ground, it also preserves jumpseat access for commuters. This time period can be used to plan ahead to find alternative means to get to work in the event that a non-union group fails to organize. This way, we avoid alienating our existing ranks of pilots by not leaving them out in the cold with a sudden policy change.

Granted, pilots that jumpseat union carriers and would support the continuation of the status-quo could be considered the same as non-union carrier pilots. By partaking of the benefits of that carrier's operations without speaking up, they turn a blind eye to the problems they cause. This would in fact also serve as fair warning that any involvement with a persistent non-union carrier is not acceptable, and give suitable amount to correct things.

Diplomacy is key. Imagine in the Cuban Missile Crisis if JFK had said "screw those commies- blast 'em!". Some of the possible outcomes of that type of scenario are intolerable. Cool headed, rational policy backed up by firm, unyielding resolve is what is needed here.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I think you guys are arguing about a policy that will never come to be. ALPA National is never going to support a change in policy to ban all non-union jumpseaters. That's a decision that each Captain has to make on his own. ALPA will always back up a Captain's right to do whatever he wants with his jumpseat, but they'll never make denials a formal policy.

 

[Firebird2XC]

I think you guys are arguing about a policy that will never come to be. ALPA National is never going to support a change in policy to ban all non-union jumpseaters. That's a decision that each Captain has to make on his own. ALPA will always back up a Captain's right to do whatever he wants with his jumpseat, but they'll never make denials a formal policy.

Maybe we can't make it a formal policy.. but we could certainly start a guerilla movement. Either way, it was mostly food for thought.

We really need to find new ways to get the attention of apathetic or short-sighted pilots out there. Despite some valiant efforts our results show that we're still falling short of the mark.

 

[Gonzo]

Take Colgan Air, for example. Seggy works there. Would you immediately deny him any and all access to jumpseat via blanket policy? If that policy were in place, that might just happen. Would it be warranted in his specific case?

Why would it not warranted?
He went to work for a non-union shop.
The fact is most non-union airlines will stay that way. The easy way to win is to kill the non-union airlines.
No jump seat means no work for a lot of non-union pilots.

 

[surreal1221]

I can't say I disagree.

Sure it sucks, but realistically. . .it's protecting OUR profession.

If these non-union pilots (who supported or lead a union drive) ended up leaving their scum of a company after a union drive failed, and allowed the 66% or whatever left to fly the line it'd be one hell of a hilarious sight.

But of course, people have "children" to feed huh?

Nevertheless, kneecap busting must return.

What's worse than management taking your hard earned money?

Another pilot taking your hard earned money. [scab]

 

[SpiceWeasel]

There's a difference between a scab and working for a non-union airline, IMO. From what I've been told you look at all the factors, not just pay, when you go work for a company. If a company doesn't happen to have a union but other things are there that you like, why be punished for it? And what about Part 135 companies with no unions?


My MEC speaks for me. I am not going to hold it against someone for working at a non-union shop. It's their choice, and unlike striking, shouldn't and won't affect me as long as my pilot group stays together.

 

[surreal1221]

Ah, the "what about 135 company card."

Easy.

135 companies can not compare to the amount of travel that is done by a customer that 121 companies provide. Not even close.

I don't care if a Part 91, 135 shop is union or not, really don't give a flying dog poo. But what I do care about, is that our fellow 121 operators ARE union, and if they are not - why the hell not? Get with the game, get with the plan, and start protecting your profession.

121 Operators (pilots) do not have to worry about a non-union 135/91 operation coming in and under cutting their wages. They do though, have to worry about another 121 operator coming in and under cutting their wages.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Damn, Gonzo and surreal, you guys are even more hard-core than I am about this. I've gotta stick up for my buddy Seggy. He shouldn't get denied just because he's still working at Colgan. He fought the good fight harder than I've ever seen a union organizer fight before, and he'll do the same again if he's still there for the drive later this year. He earned his jumpseat. Being a union organizer is something that very few people have the stones to do. You're putting not just your job, but your entire career on the line for the cause. Union organizers should always get a pass, and that goes for the guys on the OC at Skywest as well.

 

[surreal1221]

So how do we confirm an individual is on ourside in this fight?

Take their word for it? Since I'm not in the 121 position yet, much less an ALPA member (yet), how do/did you guys deal with a situation like Seg's?

 

[Firebird2XC]

Why would it not warranted?
He went to work for a non-union shop.
The fact is most non-union airlines will stay that way. The easy way to win is to kill the non-union airlines.
No jump seat means no work for a lot of non-union pilots.

I singled out Seggy for multiple reasons:

A) He's known here and I know him personally.

B) He was one of the ALPA organizing committee members at Colgan Air. He, like I, may not have realized the need for union representation when hired, but is actively working hard to change things. He's a loud and active voice for union efforts and principles. Unionistas punishing people like him with things like a jumpseat ban would be burning one of our own.

It's one thing to be militant. It's another to be cannibalistic.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

There's a difference between a scab and working for a non-union airline, IMO. From what I've been told you look at all the factors, not just pay, when you go work for a company. If a company doesn't happen to have a union but other things are there that you like, why be punished for it?

You should be punished for it because you're not contributing to the cause. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. Giving a jumpseat to a non-union pilot so he can go to work is like handing a gun to the guy who's trying to mug you. Why assist the guy who's stealing money out of your pocket? Make no mistake about it, that's exactly what anti-union pilots are doing.

My MEC speaks for me. I am not going to hold it against someone for working at a non-union shop. It's their choice, and unlike striking, shouldn't and won't affect me as long as my pilot group stays together.

As a former member of your MEC, allow me to educate you. You're living in a fantasy world if you believe that non-union pilot groups don't affect you. Unity among your own pilot group is certainly important, but having non-union airlines out there most certainly affects your bargaining power. All the unity in the world amongst your own group won't do you any good as long as there are anti-union scumbags out there trying to undercut you.

 

[Firebird2XC]

So how do we confirm an individual is on ourside in this fight?

Take their word for it? Since I'm not in the 121 position yet, much less an ALPA member (yet), how do/did you guys deal with a situation like Seg's?

Therein lies the rub. Clearly there would be some out there that would not deserve the punishment levied out in a unilateral ban, of sorts.

I remember parts of Flying The Line talking about ALPA looking after key individuals who got caught in this sort of situation. I'd assume something could be arranged again if sufficient interest were put into it.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So how do we confirm an individual is on ourside in this fight?

A few simple questions will usually lead to the truth. Anyone can claim to be a pro-union guy, but you can usually weed out the lairs with some quick questions.

 

[derg]

Alright folks, chill out some.

I don't want to return from lunchie to a discussion about building concentration camps, final solutions and such.

 

[BobDDuck]

To put this back on the latest subject (as in how to convince non union shops to join up) I think you are looking at this all wrong. You guys are focusing on how much better the contracts/work rules/pay is at union places versus non union places. Unfortunately, that doesn't always hold true. For example, the current pay and work rules at Skywest are somewhat better then where I am, with the exception of first year pay. Colgan's reserve work rules, believe it or not, are better then what we have here. Repushuttaqua actually has a lot of stuff in their contract that we would kill to get (I know... they are union, but not ALPA). Remember, regrettably, this is the "ME" generation we are working with now, so to get started, you can't appeal to the greater good of the industry. You have to tell them how it will help THEM. But saying to a new starry eyed pilot at a non union carrier that by brining ALPA in their quality of life will all of the sudden get better is at best a long stretch and at worst a lie.

I think there are two (well, maybe two and a half) things that should be focused on. First, the side benefits. Legal, medical, safety, training etc etc. No in house union (subsidized by the company ala SKYW or paid for by the pilots ala SWA) can provide that. The second thing to focus on, and this one is harder, especially with the whole mindset that "I won't be here for more then a year or so before I make it to the big show", is that just because there is good pay and work rules now, there is no legally binding requirement that the company keep them tomorrow. And they'll argue, "but they have ALWAYS paid us well, why would they stop now? And besides, I'll be upgraded in a year, and almost out the door, so what do I care?" ALPA needs to figure out how to answer that question to the satisfaction of those that only care about themselves. It's going to be a tough, uphill battle.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

You should be punished for it because you're not contributing to the cause. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. Giving a jumpseat to a non-union pilot so he can go to work is like handing a gun to the guy who's trying to mug you. Why assist the guy who's stealing money out of your pocket? Make no mistake about it, that's exactly what anti-union pilots are doing.




As a former member of your MEC, allow me to educate you. You're living in a fantasy world if you believe that non-union pilot groups don't affect you. Unity among your own pilot group is certainly important, but having non-union airlines out there most certainly affects your bargaining power. All the unity in the world amongst your own group won't do you any good as long as there are anti-union scumbags out there trying to undercut you.

Hmm well then what I am supposed to do about my friends at my old pt 135 company that don't have a union? There are 25 pilots there for 10 airplanes. The pay sucks a little, you make a 35K a year salary first year then you get paid second year on based on hours/miles. All great guys, great company, doesn't need a union. But if they were CASS I wouldn't let them into my jumpseat because they're hurting me? I'm not trying to stir s* up but I just don't see that.

One thing that scares me about being in a union (and I used to be in UFCW when I was at Albertson's) is that I feel that having a differing opinion will land me on the same list as if I were someone crossing a line. I just want the full story from everyone, personally, but apparently they're not able to give it to me since there's some STUPID non-disclosure agreement between management and union reps. How do I truly get spoken for if I have no idea what they are saying. I like to see it on paper, not just out of someone's mouth, if you know what I mean.

Writing how I feel is actually a bit scary, you know. I wouldn't want to ruin a career I just started. It took a lot in my mind to put these two posts down in this thread. Sit down, shut up, and follow is probably the best I'm sure.