Lowers but raised dues?

We're not.

Never forget where you came from. Because if you do, you certainly aren't going to like where you end up.

We're conditioned to loan our bike to the bully down the street for safety and protection.

Then, we're coerced into BUYING back OUR bike, piece by piece and being told by our big brother that "Dude, you're getting a sweet deal on those parts. Boom, yeah, who's your daddy? Daddy got you a good deal on those parts."

Maybe someday our "big brother" will help us stand up for ourselves, rather than throwing parties celebrating success in selling us bits and pieces of what we already own and haven't had returned, as promised.

We're not going to see eye to eye on where we are as an industry.

Edit:
bully = company negotiator
Big brother = union leadership, not necessarily ALPA.


Sent from my Colecovision Adam
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Which doesn't in any way prohibit the reps from explaining to you that maybe demanding a pony in the next contract might not be the most prudent move. If they explain it, do some polling data, and the data still shows that every pilot demands a pony, then I would agree that that's exactly what they should strive for. But claiming that they shouldn't do their best to educate the membership and explain why certain things might not be such a good idea is just irresponsible. Leaders have a responsibility to not just carry out the will of their constituents, but to try to use the information and experience that they have at their disposal to try to lead the members in the direction that will best serve their interests. If the members still demand something different, then again, so be it. Otherwise, we might as well not even have elected leaders.
Click to expand...

Has there ever been a situation like this in recent years? One where the reps advised their membership against something, the membership demanded it anyway, the reps went forward with it as demanded by the masses, it was shot down, and the reps had to come back to the pilots and say "we tried to tell you......but you guys wouldn't listen".
 
ATN_Pilot said:
The problem with that argument is that some of the people who were paying on 100% of their income were the guys making the least, and some of the guys not paying on 100% of their income are the guys making the most. For example, Piedmont pilots have been paying on 100% of their income because they have a frozen pension plan. But AirTran pilots don't pay on all of our income, because we only have a 401k plan (have I mentioned lately that SWA's retirement plan sucks?).

So, as a result, the DHC-8 FO making $30k at Piedmont pays an effective dues rate of 1.95%, while I make a six figure income and only pay an effective dues rate of 1.82%. Do you think that's fair? That sounds a lot more like the Rmoney plan to me.
Click to expand...

And there were two ways to level the playing field. Which one did ALPA choose? They could have taken option b) and put the big guys with what the single point retirement plans were getting while keeping dues at 1.95%. Instead, the do this, and they lower dues a 0.05% as a carrot. Why? So they can tell people they lowered dues, when in fact many people will be paying MORE in dues. Bait, meet switch.

Come on, Steve, I thought you were smarter than that! ALPA is not responsible for the mess at Pinnacle. Morons like Phil Trenary and Doug Shockey are responsible for that mess. ALPA can't prevent management stupidity. ALPA can only deal with it as effectively as possible, and that's exactly what ALPA is doing.
Click to expand...

I'm not even talking about the managerial mess at Pinnacle. I'm talking about the hypocrisy coming from ALPA. We're "taking it back," but more and more flying seems to be going to places like GoJets while Comair goes under. Delta seems just fine with selling out scope and code sharing their way into fixing their staffing issues down the road. I've got tons of stuff to critique on our own MEC. Wanna know why I'm not a committee chair anymore? They didn't even bother to check if P2P HAD one before putting in their own Mesaba guy. This is after I sent multiple e-mails to their MEC asking for conference calls. I found out there was a new chair from one of the other committee members asking why I wasn't chair anymore. ALPA seems perfectly content to let airlines spin into oblivion without any kind of leadership from the top.

As far as your new carrier, I think you're going to find yourself in the minority now. JetBlue pilots are begging ALPA to come back for another organizing drive. Management took their last vote as license to do whatever the hell they want, and conditions have gotten worse. You'll probably be an ALPA member again within a couple of years. And that's a good thing.
Click to expand...

I think you'll still find plenty of guys that will vote against ALPA if it's the only choice. IMHO, it may be cutting off their nose, but it's the truth. I think most pilots support an AGREEMENT, but not necessarily ALPA. You'll find more that are better inclined towards an in-house union than ALPA. If the Teamsters showed up tomorrow, they'd probably get the same result as ALPA from the jetBlue guys. Don't go thinking it's just ALPA. It's a CBA they want, not necessarily ALPA.

We already hold the BOD meetings in the cheapest locations possible. You have to remember that we need a meeting location that can hold 400+ people in a single room. It's like a hotel setting up to accommodate Congress. That immediately chucks all of the "middle of nowhere" hotels. They simply can't accommodate an event of this size. So, we're stuck with all of the large city markets. From that point, we have to use unionized hotels. So we again weed out a bunch of locations. We're left with the biggest hotels in the biggest markets. Places like New Orleans, Las Vegas, SoCal, and South Florida. We pick the cheapest of those locations. Vegas and Lauderdale are about even on cost, and the delegates tend to prefer Florida, which is also easier for people to get to, so that's why we go there. It's not about "going on vacation." For the most part, nobody even gets out of the hotel for a week. You're stuck in meetings the entire time. Believe me, this isn't as glamorous as you think it is. Nothing about union work is. I wish I was sitting in the corner office and eating lobster everyday like people think I am, but sadly, that's not the case.
Click to expand...

Certainly a far cry from what I've heard others bragging about. The tales of the amount of booze my union dues have bought astounds me. At this point, ALPA's going to have to win back my support with deeds, not words. I bought off on the words before. I haven't seen much to actually convince me they meant anything other than lip service. Things like the dues cut/hike are only going to give ALPA detractors more ammunition. The fact it's being spun the way it is only makes things worse. If they wanted to make it fair, as I said before, there's two ways they could have gone about it. I think they chose the wrong path, and now they're trying to damage control it.
 
MikeD said:
Has there ever been a situation like this in recent years? One where the reps advised their membership against something, the membership demanded it anyway, the reps went forward with it as demanded by the masses, it was shot down, and the reps had to come back to the pilots and say "we tried to tell you......but you guys wouldn't listen".
Click to expand...

I can't think of one off of the top of my head. I can certainly think of instances where the attorneys have tried to convince an MEC not to take a certain action to no avail, and then the MEC had to learn to listen to the attorneys the hard way. But in most cases, when the MEC takes the effort to explain something to the membership, the overwhelming majority of the members will get on board. The angry few may disagree, but the polling data will always indicate where the pilot group really is, and they're usually far more reasonable than what the internet message boards and crew lounge loudmouths would lead you to believe.
 
kellwolf said:
And there were two ways to level the playing field. Which one did ALPA choose? They could have taken option b) and put the big guys with what the single point retirement plans were getting while keeping dues at 1.95%. Instead, the do this, and they lower dues a 0.05% as a carrot. Why? So they can tell people they lowered dues, when in fact many people will be paying MORE in dues. Bait, meet switch.
Click to expand...

Actually, what you suggest was definitely discussed. There's just one big problem with it: it costs $7 million per year. We would have to raise the overall dues rate to about 2.10% to make up for the lost revenue by exempting everyone's 401k contributions. That just wasn't a feasible option, and we couldn't take a $7 million hit to the budget while still maintaining essential services to the members and maintaining the MCF.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
See, that right there is exactly the issue I have with ALPA nowadays. You are supposed to represent us. If the majority of the pilot group wants a pony in the next contract, you guys are supposed to negotiate for it.
Click to expand...
Sort of. We have representative republics and other representative forms of government out the wazoo in this country, and:

"A representative owes the People not only his industry, but his judgment, and he betrays them if he sacrifices it to their opinion." - Lyman Hall.

BUT. The nice thing about representative governance is that you can just throw them out if you don't like their judgment.

And again, no freaking way I would have voted yes on the Eagle TA had I been there. Implementing PBS in a bankruptcy = the company gets to do it their way, not yours.
 
One thing about PBS is that it's completely awesome if it's meant to make everyone's life better and there is QC control, run by pilots.

However, if there is no pilot-run QC and it's done to extract every bit of efficiency out of the pilot group. Batten down the hatches, matey.
 
The more I read the more I think ATN and Trip7 are people I would never want leading my pilot group. Unless I was trying to sabotage my career.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
ATN has done more to shape my view of ALPA than the rest of ALPA has.
Click to expand...

Which is unfortunate because he really has very little to do with the day to day ALPA operation you will come in contact with over your career (at an ALPA carrier anyway). I very much disagree with the politics and big picture view that ALPA has taken as of late, but as far as the services I actually use and the staff members I work with (oh yeah, those grossly overpaid staffers) I've always been happy.
 
kellwolf said:
Certainly a far cry from what I've heard others bragging about. The tales of the amount of booze my union dues have bought astounds me. At this point, ALPA's going to have to win back my support with deeds, not words. I bought off on the words before. I haven't seen much to actually convince me they meant anything other than lip service. Things like the dues cut/hike are only going to give ALPA detractors more ammunition. The fact it's being spun the way it is only makes things worse. If they wanted to make it fair, as I said before, there's two ways they could have gone about it. I think they chose the wrong path, and now they're trying to damage control it.
Click to expand...

As far as the Pinnacolaba MEC is concerned, I put a stop to that for the brief time I was controlling the funds. Not sure where it's at today....but I don't believe that's a problem any longer. FYI: Your DTW reps and former PCL MEC officers were some of the biggest abusers....that said, they weren't alone.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Like I said, nothing but rumors and supposition. "Such-and-such rep said they did this!" "Oh yeah, well I heard this other rep said this other thing that's even worse!" "Rabble, rabble, rabble!!!!!!!!1111"

Look, I'm not going to get into details about your own internal MEC politics. I have my own opinions, but I'll keep them to myself. My only point was to make it clear that classifying something as "meetings/snacks" is NOT hiding something. That's exactly how every volunteer is taught to expense these things. Whether it's a few drinks after a meeting, pizza for a local council meeting, or taking some volunteers out for appetizers and drinks to thank them for their service, it all goes under the same category: meetings/snacks. It's the only place that it fits. Saying that they're "hiding" it is just plain wrong. You can claim that it's wrong for them to be purchasing it at all if you want. That's an arguable point with ethical, moral, and even religious significance for some. But calling them liars for simply classifying the expense in exactly the way they're told to do it is BS.
Click to expand...

No, It ISN'T RUMORS. The guy bought 57 drinks and tried to expense it against the EAGLE MEC alcohol policy they voted in earlier in the year. He knew exactly what he was doing. You are no different than the rest of the clowns we have in or MEC trying to weasel out of it. It's a damn fact..The guy FLAT OUT lied about it, SAID IT WAS FOR FOOD purchased for the group late at night (read the attached report), He lied about it more than once after he lied about it the first time, read the documents, he got caught red handed with the itemized receipt, then FINALLY admitted he lied about it in the next meeting. The only rumor is someone saying there was more than the 5 people that we know were there for sure.

and No, it isn't an arguable point. It's clearly wrong what he did, and yes he is a liar, read the attached documents. When you say you purchased food working late at the office (and had leftovers for the next day), when in reality you purchased 57 drinks at Finnegan's. That is a big fat lie. It was intentional deception to pay for their own little party on us.
 
On a somewhat related note, I know that reps are bought off of trips when on Union duty. Are they getting any sort of per diem?
 
SrFnFly227 said:
On a somewhat related note, I know that reps are bought off of trips when on Union duty. Are they getting any sort of per diem?
Click to expand...

If food isn't covered during the time you are doing ALPA work you can claim the CONUS M&E rate for whatever location you are in. The computer system ALPA uses for reimbursement (it was CONCUR it's now INFOR, which is marginally better) calculates your per diem based on a bunch of inputs from the user. I can't say I've ever come out ahead after a few days of work and I don't drink.
 
Cruise said:
As far as the Pinnacolaba MEC is concerned, I put a stop to that for the brief time I was controlling the funds. Not sure where it's at today....but I don't believe that's a problem any longer. FYI: Your DTW reps and former PCL MEC officers were some of the biggest abusers....that said, they weren't alone.
Click to expand...
Cruise said:
As far as the Pinnacolaba MEC is concerned, I put a stop to that for the brief time I was controlling the funds. Not sure where it's at today....but I don't believe that's a problem any longer. FYI: Your DTW reps and former PCL MEC officers were some of the biggest abusers....that said, they weren't alone.
Click to expand...

You mean the DTW/JFK reps that kept forgetting they repped JFK? Don't get me started on that whole thing. JfK still doesn't have their own reps. Pretty sure we're plenty big enough for our own reps now. Maybe guys that need them will be able to get a hold if them when they need them. I got more out of the Colgan EWR guys than my own "reps."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Did this merit an Interview?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
N1ceguy
N
F
2022-2023 cycle raises
Replies
3
Views
1K
who'swho
who'swho
Rosstafari
Hey, pilots: make sure you have enough insurance. Mine just saved me from ruin.
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
derg
derg
future pilot
Changing careers with a young family
Replies
13
Views
2K
galleycartinop
G
B
Sierra West Dispatcher Opening
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Pepwave1
Pepwave1
Back
Top