SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Raise?
When did we start calling "snap back" raises?
This again? You and I are never going to agree on the definition of this simple word.
Raise?
When did we start calling "snap back" raises?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
We're not going to see eye to eye on where we are as an industry.
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".
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.
Sort of. We have representative republics and other representative forms of government out the wazoo in this country, and: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.
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.
ATN has done more to shape my view of ALPA than the rest of ALPA has.
That's affirmative.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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.