How many card-carrying union lawyers, doctors and accountants are there?
They are setting standards in order to keep people out of the profession.
You might as well have the public clamoring for "ALPA certified" pilots.
Please explain unions to me.
- Thread starter Nark
- Start date
How many card-carrying union lawyers, doctors and accountants are there?
They are setting standards in order to keep people out of the profession.
You might as well have the public clamoring for "ALPA certified" pilots.
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
The question of a need for unions has undoubted changed since the days of the industrial boom. I think unions exist in many cases, because they can.
Small group of people: very little influence on the company and little desire for representation
Large group of people: bigger influence on the company and in some cases, a need for representation
A company might think twice about moving an entire department to a different building, thus making things much less convenient for that department, if it’s just to make their floor a breakroom if that department is represented.
Small group of people: very little influence on the company and little desire for representation
Large group of people: bigger influence on the company and in some cases, a need for representation
A company might think twice about moving an entire department to a different building, thus making things much less convenient for that department, if it’s just to make their floor a breakroom if that department is represented.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Yes, they are setting standards in order to keep people out and to maintain the integrity of their respective professions.
I want competent lawyers and well trained doctors, if that means having the ABA or AMA setting training standards and professional practice standards than so be it.
I personally would welcome ALPA's involvement in setting professional standards that protects the integrity of the segment of the profession they represent while providing an increase in QOL and in essence, setting a floor to wages for respective airframes and seats.
Is that so wrong?
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
I could say the same thing about the 1200TT requirement for 135 IFR mins, I could say the same thing about the 250TT requirement for commercial. Why do I need 250TT to get my CSEL? Why not at 100, that 150 extra total time pushes me out of much income earning potential? There's holes in both sides.
I think there needs to be a professional standards organization like AMA, ABA, that takes pilots to the next level of proficiency, and is more or less required for a job. I can't see any reason against that. Artificial shortage = more money.
-pat
Setting standards to enter the profession has little to do with compensation or QOL.
This is the difference between a professional organization and a union based on where you work or who you work for. Unions result in labor being viewed by management as a commodity.
Now if being "ALPA certified" carried a cache of being trained to higher standards, I would absolutely agree with you. That should be the basis for higher compensation.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Very well Pat, I have my personal opinions as far as TT being used as a gauge for certificate issuance from a federal agency and I am largely happy with the standards set by the FAA for their certificates. Now, if I wasn't happy, I would be seeking out a lobbying body to take my fight to my respective legislative members.
But, I'm glad to see we do agree on the fact that professional associations (be it ALPA, or whatever LARGER BODY that can encompass their respective segment of the professional piloting community) need to manage the supply and demand curve in an effort to improve pay and quality of life.
Okay.
ALPA is an association, composed of small unions.
In my opinion, there is far too much independence of the local leadership and as such the profession has been negatively impacted by such behavior. (I'm sure I'll get smacked around by PCL and Velo for departing from the party line, but. . .here goes.)
A strong "national" Association is needed, not a hodge-podge collective of people with their own motives and goals. One national standard, and make sure the groups that make up the national association meets or exceeds the nationally set standards.
But, I'm glad to see we do agree on the fact that professional associations (be it ALPA, or whatever LARGER BODY that can encompass their respective segment of the professional piloting community) need to manage the supply and demand curve in an effort to improve pay and quality of life.
Okay.
ALPA is an association, composed of small unions.
In my opinion, there is far too much independence of the local leadership and as such the profession has been negatively impacted by such behavior. (I'm sure I'll get smacked around by PCL and Velo for departing from the party line, but. . .here goes.)
A strong "national" Association is needed, not a hodge-podge collective of people with their own motives and goals. One national standard, and make sure the groups that make up the national association meets or exceeds the nationally set standards.
What national standard would you suggest?
The current standard is check-the-box and pay your dues.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
No, the current standard is meet the FAA's requirements.
I propose that the professional association needs to control the supply and demand curve by implementing professional standards (what they are, I do not know, but I wouldn't mind taking part in a debate with empirical data that can show how the demand and supply curve might change depending on standards set) as an effort to produce an artificle shortage of "qualified" (by the professional standards set by the professional association) pilots.
I propose that the professional association needs to control the supply and demand curve by implementing professional standards (what they are, I do not know, but I wouldn't mind taking part in a debate with empirical data that can show how the demand and supply curve might change depending on standards set) as an effort to produce an artificle shortage of "qualified" (by the professional standards set by the professional association) pilots.
If the FAA standards were all that required, any commercial pilot could become an ALPA member with all the benefits (?) that brings.
The issue with piloting is that it is hard to determine the standards that make someone exceptionally qualified. Unless there is some real basis for the standards, it is just arbitrarily limiting the pool for a sub-segment's benefit.
The next stop is socialism, planned economies, and a wallscreen in your apartment requiring your adherance to the day's exercise schedule.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
I'm not really sure how I'm seeing your connection between a professional association that desires to sets standards that need to be meet for inclusion into the association or to have the ability to earn a job with a company that requires such standards (dictated by the professional association) and Orwell's 1984 and Big Brother.
Any Commercially rated pilot can still find work, but if they want to work for a company that subscribes to the professional standards set by a professional association (not neccessarily ALPA in all instances) they will yes need to meet those standards, but that in no way means they can not find work, they just can't work there.
Which, is significantly different than the ABA and AMA where ABA/AMA certification is at the educational level and not at the job placement level.
ALPA, at one time, did have an associate type of membership that was available for Commercially rated pilots. The Association of Independent Airmen. But, that's for a whole 'nother thread, but it essentially sought to bring ALL AIRMEN into the fold when it comes to issues that impact the profession. In an effort to better inform those who fly for a living to the challenges and benefits of the professional organization.
It's a shame such a thing is no longer available, at least then it would be the ying to flight school and large universities marketing department yangs. The ALPA National Education Committee is striving to be the avenue for this, but I would gladly welcome the return of the AIA.
Any Commercially rated pilot can still find work, but if they want to work for a company that subscribes to the professional standards set by a professional association (not neccessarily ALPA in all instances) they will yes need to meet those standards, but that in no way means they can not find work, they just can't work there.
Which, is significantly different than the ABA and AMA where ABA/AMA certification is at the educational level and not at the job placement level.
ALPA, at one time, did have an associate type of membership that was available for Commercially rated pilots. The Association of Independent Airmen. But, that's for a whole 'nother thread, but it essentially sought to bring ALL AIRMEN into the fold when it comes to issues that impact the profession. In an effort to better inform those who fly for a living to the challenges and benefits of the professional organization.
It's a shame such a thing is no longer available, at least then it would be the ying to flight school and large universities marketing department yangs. The ALPA National Education Committee is striving to be the avenue for this, but I would gladly welcome the return of the AIA.
mrivc211
Well-Known Member
In my five years at the regional level, two of which were spent organizing a union(which failed big time) I've learned the only way guys are going to accept a union as a necassary tool is if their feet are held to the fire. You can preach all you want, they're just not going to see it your way.
If the standard is arbitrary and without a real increase to safety (or whatever legitimate standard is selected) then the standard is designed to exclude otherwise qualified pilots.
If otherwise-qualified pilots are excluded, then you are essentially saying that yeah, you're qualified, you have the education/experience/etc. but because you're not a party member (ALPA or otherwise) you are not eligible for working at airline X.
The standard should not be merely a requirement of keeping a job. It should be a credential that signfies advanced training.
If the standard's reason for existence is to limit the pool of otherwise-qualified people, then I submit that we are on a road to socialism.
If otherwise-qualified pilots are excluded, then you are essentially saying that yeah, you're qualified, you have the education/experience/etc. but because you're not a party member (ALPA or otherwise) you are not eligible for working at airline X.
The standard should not be merely a requirement of keeping a job. It should be a credential that signfies advanced training.
If the standard's reason for existence is to limit the pool of otherwise-qualified people, then I submit that we are on a road to socialism.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Just to be clear, I'm not advocating individuals meeting a standard for inclusion into the association.
I'm advocating having the association setting the hiring standards required, in an effort to maintain the integrity (supply vs. demand curve) of the profession.
Individuals can still fly for a living and make money elsewhere without going to a company that subscribes to the hiring standards set by the professional association.
I'm advocating having the association setting the hiring standards required, in an effort to maintain the integrity (supply vs. demand curve) of the profession.
Individuals can still fly for a living and make money elsewhere without going to a company that subscribes to the hiring standards set by the professional association.
So the union gets a veto over a qualified candidate because he does not carry a "professional association" membership card signifying he has met the "professonal standards" of the union?
The company's hiring standards might not include "association membership."
I would advocate a "professional standard" that signifies that the person was more qualified then others based on a safety reason (or other legitimate reason). This in turn would require a company hiring him to recognize this with additional compensation/QOL etc.
An airline could advertise (for example): 100% of our pilots are ALPA certified. The public would be willing to pay more for this benefit theoretically.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
The individual wouldn't be turned away because the member would not be invited to an interview if he/she did not already meet the hiring requirements (set by the association).
The individual, if they met the standards, and were subsequently hired by said company, would then become a member of the association. No one is getting turned away, you either meet the requirements for the job (much like today) or you do not.
The individual, if they met the standards, and were subsequently hired by said company, would then become a member of the association. No one is getting turned away, you either meet the requirements for the job (much like today) or you do not.
Union shop: You've got a union card (paid dues) and you meet the basic requirements (total time, multi time), you get the job.
Non-union shop: You meet the basic requirements (total time, multi time), you are a member of a professional organization signifying advanced credential, you get the job. And if it is difficult enough to get the advanced credential maybe the company throws in additional compensation/QOL to get you to take the job.
The public doesn't want to pay $90 for a round trip JFK-LAX and you're expecting them to want to pay more because the pilots are "ALPA Certified"?
Half of the public seeing this would go "eh...no big deal" and the other half would say/think "why are the pilots certified by dog food?".
-mini
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
I'm well aware of the two terms.
Anyway, the thread has certainly taken a side track.
Nevertheless, essentially, a union in our profession is put simply as job and career protection. Take it or leave it.
Frankly, I would not expect the public to pay anything for ALPA certification unless it actually meant something. That's what the FAA standards are for.
I agree.