Air Line Pilot, July/August 2002, p.12
By Chris Dodd, Staff Writer

Since deregulation of the U.S. airline industry, he added, managements have evolved into "these logistical enterprises, involving cargo or passengers, with ways to separate pilots and airplanes from what they consider the real core business of the airline—sales and marketing." When code-sharing withstood its legal challenges, "the possibility and practice of separating pilots and airplanes into as many different companies as possible and as far away from the money trail as possible accelerated at warp speed."

For that reason, "every pilot group —both large and small—needs a scope clause," Capt. Woerth declared. Without it, "transferring work away from a signed contract doesn’t even require managements to break into a sweat.… They can do it over lunch."

ALPA’s President cited the importance of the Scope Impact Committee, which action of the 2000 Board of Directors created and which has required MECs to create standing committees and meet with code-share partners to work toward solutions on legitimate job security concerns.

"Let’s be perfectly candid here," Capt. Woerth told the Executive Board, "if there was understandable stress in any of these relationships during the record growth years of the late 1990s,the stress when more than 5,000 pilots are furloughed and/or terminated is infinitely greater. That’s the simple truth.…"

ALPA’s first vice-president, Capt. Dennis Dolan, who chairs ALPA’s Security Task Force, briefed the Executive Board on security. He noted that the public ranks security issues in reverse order—focusing on screening checkpoints, arming the cockpit, and reinforcing cockpit doors—than most pilots—who press for transportation worker identification cards or restoring a reciprocal jumpseat program. That is, he explained, because the first three are issues with which the public had some exposure (albeit shallow) and because the press often gives prominent play to a "sexy issue" like arming pilots.

"The things that are most important to us [ID cards and jumpseat access] are last in their eyes, not first," he pointed out. "That’s why it’s much more difficult for us to convince people that these are our priorities."

Capt. Dolan noted that progress on the TWIC card has been "slow moving," as the Transportation Security Administration, established after 9/11 to administer many of the new security programs, determined it would do its own research and development on an airport ID "smart card" program rather than tap into the extensive groundwork that ALPA and other organizations had already done. He said that ALPA would be "counting on some of our friends in Congress to press [for answers] on why more progress has not been made.…We know the system is available and that it works. Let’s implement it."

Capt. Dolan also added that the Association had had a number of meetings with the FAA and was "very close" to restoring the reciprocal jumpseat program. At the time of the meeting, ALPA security volunteers and staff were working with the agency to draft a document to provide guidance to carriers on restoring jumpseating practices. Discussions with the FAA have focused on security requirements as they relate to an ID and employment-verification process.

Later, following committee discussion, the Executive Board passed a resolution pledging the Association’s full support to the proposed verification procedures being developed and directing ALPA’s President to take "any and all additional appropriate measures" to ensure that the reciprocal jumpseat is restored. The Board also pledged the necessary resources to the Association’s "Qualified to Fly, Qualified to Defend" campaign promoting a voluntary program for arming airline cockpits.

Because of the increased responsibility that the Association’s security personnel have shouldered since Sept. 11, 2001, Capt. Dolan said, ALPA plans to redesign and reorganize its National Security Committee. The Task Force was a good "stop-gap measure," he noted, but was never designed to deal with the efforts that will have to be directed to security for the long haul.

He suggested that the redesigned committee be project-oriented, as ALPA’s Engineering and Air Safety Department largely is now, to deal with FAA and other government initiatives in a cost-effective and efficient manner. "As the FAA issues its ADs—its airworthiness directives—and we have someone to plug into those, we want to make certain that when the TSA issues its security directives, we’ll have somebody to plug into those."

He called for more line pilot involvement in the Association’s security activities, saying that the Association preferred to build the new structure "from the bottom up, rather than the top down."

Capt. John Feldvary, the Association’s vice-president–finance/treasurer, reported on the Association’s finances. The emergency actions to reduce spending begun after Sept. 11, 2001, left the Association in better financial shape than had been predicted, he noted, but he warned that the serious financial difficulties at major carriers such as United and US Airways could still destabilize that situation. "We have not bottomed out yet," he said.

Partly as a response, the Executive Board proposed a "tweak" in the funding mechanism for the Major Contingency Fund, the Association’s "War Chest."

Established in 1985 to fund MEC activities in advanced stages of contract negotiations or during a strike or to treat issues of urgent concern that significantly and adversely affect the profession, the fund now has a cash balance of $70.3 million, Capt. Feldvary reported.

The changes, which are still subject to ratification by the full Board of Directors (that vote to be counted on July 10), provides for the Executive Council, during the budgeting process and the fiscal year, to provide for an allocation of a portion of the 0.1 percent of the 1.95 percent of dues formerly allotted to the Administrative and Support Account to be used to fund the MCF, so long as Association services to the members are not adversely affected.

The Executive Council, which reviews all of the Association’s financial planning, including preparation of the annual budget, would monitor the new funding arrangement to assess its continued effect on the MCF.

The modification would allow the MCF, which has come under stress in recent years because of strikes or near-strikes by several airline pilot groups, not only to stay above its $65 million "floor," but also to grow so that it might reach self-sufficiency.

During the meeting, the Executive Board approved an MCF allocation of $2 million for the ATA MEC and an allocation of $1 million for the Champion Air MEC for strike preparedness programs. ATA had been in negotiations since May 2000 and Champion since Feb. 26, 1999.

Capt. Jerry Mugerditchian, vice-president–administration/secretary, reported that the Association at the time of the meeting had 51,778 active members, with a total of 4,743 on furlough. The number of inactive participants (6,816) was 2,400 more than 6 months ago, reflecting the merger of TWA into American Airlines.

The Executive Board also affirmed the decision of the Executive Council to place the Emery pilot group into custodianship. The company shut down operations of the cargo carrier August 2001, after the FAA challenged maintenance operations at the carrier following crew member complaints. Emery remains embroiled in an NTSB investigation into the crash of an Emery flight in February 2000, which is continuing and which is expected to lead to a broader probe of maintenance practices at other cargo carriers.

Capt. Woerth, who noted that the pilot group had held out hope that the carrier might resume operations at some point, said that possibility is now remote, and under ALPA’s Constitution and By-Laws, the Association "could not reestablish an MEC with no active members."

He praised former Emery MEC chairman, Capt. Tom Rachford, who "was the reason that Emery pilots got to ALPA in the first place" and who, Capt. Woerth said, was "relentless in his pursuit" of questionable operations at the carrier. Capt. Rachford, who had served as an ALPA executive vice-president, received a standing ovation.

The Executive Board also heard a presentation from the Special Representational Structure Review Committee (SRSRC), tasked by the 2000 Board of Directors with examining the Association’s representation framework.

Capt. Paul Rice (United), one of three members of the Committee, reported that at present, the SRSRC is looking at local council election cycles and terms of office. Currently, representatives serve 2-year terms. Councils are divided into two election groups, with half the groups voting on officers each year.

Under that scenario, roughly 50 percent of the membership of ALPA’s MECs turn over each year. At the past two ALPA Board of Directors meetings, only 30 percent of delegates had ever been to an ALPA BOD meeting before. That amount of turnover takes its toll on an organization, Capt. Rice said.

Previous ALPA groups that studied the Association’s representational structures (in 1985 and 1992) suggested that ALPA adopt 3-year terms for local council representatives and three election cycles.

Capt. Rice said that the SRSRC also favors such a system, as only a third of the BOD would turn over each year and training provided at ALPA’s annual Leadership Conference, usually in February, could be offered to new representatives early in their terms. The Committee expects to explain the concept to ALPA councils over the next several months and to present a formal recommendation to the BOD this fall. If the BOD adopts a cycle of 3-year terms and three election groups this fall, the transition to a new system could be completed by March 2006, Capt. Rice said.

The Executive Board also passed several resolutions regarding electronic communications—a boon to an organization whose membership is technologically advanced and perpetually in motion, but a potential risk because it often transmits sensitive information.