upndsky

Does that include seniority?

forgot to bid

I sure hope not, I don't even like the idea of longevity or benefits.

If I were a regional pilot, in the bottom 90%, I'd a) be completely against flow throughs, b) want to have the opportunity to prove myself better than anyone senior or junior to me to get a job at mainline and if I take a risk to quit one job and sign on for another I certainly would not want to see that same person who didn't risk anything benefit because to them thats fair.

I still think the best option is Compass, its small and it gives us access to the 76 seat planes. They're set to be merged with us anyway through the flow through so just bring them on and we now have the planes and we can expand from there.

Bucking Bar

That's why I ask mi amigos to stop trying to figure out the details of integration before WE collectively decide to pursue such a policy, which means changing minds on our MEC.

Lets look to the rare example of a merger that has worked and how that was managed. Did we know how the NWA merger was going to be implemented before we voted for it? Did we know what seniority would be?

I'll sure give Chairman Moak and the MEC (on both sides) credit for pulling off the smoothest merger I've ever heard about, or experienced. They did an excellent job managing their pilots.

Those would choose to fight unity will direct us into no win arguments on the details while they continue to subdivide and outsource our work. We have to be disciplined and focused if we expect success.

As is, both our own MEC and Management are against unity. Probably more our own MEC than management, which is ironic. It is a battle I doubt we will win anyway, but if we are even going to try we need to avoid letting folks pull us into these arguments.

Bottom line: Focus your energies for the next several months into doing what is effective. Learn about your Candidates backgrounds. Learn if they are entrenched insiders who will vote with ALPA's political machine, or if they will vote for YOU. Get those nomination cards filled out and submitted. Talk to the guys you fly with and those you see in the crews rooms. Get your Candidates elected.

It is not going to be easy. Those who are against unity have been fighting this war and winning for a long time and they are smart and seasoned experts at this game. We are hack novices in comparison. The difference is that we are right and they are wrong. Those who think outsourcing can be tolerated are like those who tried to appease Hitler. As Winston Churchill stated so well, appeasement is "like feeding an alligator, hoping it will eat you last."

forgot to bid

I agree with what you are saying but to me the company would never allow it. Making a single contractor would be a risk that no company would accept. CAL reworked XJT into the product it wanted it to be unitl they realized their exposure and they reversed course. Oddly enough a lot of it started after the Comair strike as I think that spooked CAL. I've not heard DAL management in any form or fashion say they wish they didn't have DCI but rather they wish they didn't have so many. They'd prefer probably to have two, just enough to keep a whipsaw that does what is intended and ensures competition and efficiency, but of course that is detrimental to pilots. Its evil but it is a tool in their arsnel to ensure efficiency.

But idea #2, that to me could work and should be done by DALPA if not only for the good of Delta passengers but also because it'd raise cost. I absolutely think enough public pressure could be created, given the Colgan crash, by DALPA to say every DCI pilot should have what we believe is a minimum level of pay and work rules. And sure it'd cost jobs but hopefully it transfer flying back to mainline and then create jobs at both levels and therein negate the downside. But I really believe we should fight for that.

AND I think, and Joe should like this, that DCI should only be allowed to have ATR 42-500s and I that it is it. I think we should have everything above 59 seats including ATR 72-500s and Dash 8-400s because frankly those can take mainline flying more than some want to admit. But thats IMHO.

Bucking Bar

... and by the way, you are right.

Bringing regional pilots over with their longevity would:
(1) Move the pay scale so far that management could not accept the added expense (even if done on a ratio the difference between year 1 and year 3 at Delta scales are more than the difference between years 1 to 5 on the regional scales)
(2) Bringing over longevity would mean new hires get paid more than current Delta pilots and use their extra pay while bumping current Delta pilots off their own airplanes on vacation - that's a poison pill that would have the DL pilots in an uproar.
(3) While I am all for unity - we have to seek equity and fairness. Giving a regional pilot tens of thousands more than a current Delta pilot would "punish" the Delta pilot for having interviewed and worked for first year pay.

One example that did work was Pan Am / Ransome. While not perfect, it was an incremental staple and Ransome pilots could bid Pan Am equipment when they could hold it.

But again, it is foolish to get into this debate. Joe and John will surely have reasons why I'm full of it and they should make more than I earn, but, who cares. Truth is I doubt our Chairman has the horsepower to pull off the promises he's making to the regional pilots and we have like 1/12,000th, or 0.000083_ that amount of power.

alfaromeo

First, it doesn't depend upon whether the pilots are ALPA are not. ALPA does not have a DFR responsibility when it comes to enforcing an individual contract. This is from our contract:

3. There will be no contracting or subcontracting of any Company flying to any other air carrier or performance of Company flying by pilots of any other air carrier without the prior written consent of the Delta MEC.

That is pretty absolute. I agree that we don't have the right to force pilots onto other lists, but we do have the right to force the company to have all DL code flying done by Delta pilots. It would be tough to negotiate, given the situation we are in, but clearly DL pilots have negotiated the right to control flying done under the DL code.


Those were combined by petitioning the NMB to be declared a single bargaining unit, they were not merged at least not initially. In that case, the first step is to prove that you are flying similar equipment on similar routes and are controlled by a single holding company. Again, you don't get to merge the seniority list(s) until the NMB makes their ruling. Asking for a PID is not the first step. You might be successful geting Comair, Mesaba, and Compass a single bargaining unit, but the other DCI carriers would not qualify. Merging companies is solely a prerogative of management. That is why you have to work a solution through management.

forgot to bid

[quote=Bucking Bar;671986]

Bottom line: Focus your energies for the next several months into doing what is effective. Learn about your Candidates backgrounds. Learn if they are entrenched insiders who will vote with ALPA's political machine, or if they will vote for YOU. Get those nomination cards filled out and submitted. Talk to the guys you fly with and those you see in the crews rooms. Get your Candidates elected.

[quote]


Okay, I will and its a good idea. I know the LEC 44 FO candidate I like and I'll promote him as much as possible.

And while I'm at it maybe I should focus some energy on using the quote application. ?

But I will have some energy left over to poke at Satchip as CFB starts in one day. Not a threat, just saying. And I am really hoping for an OU vs OSU Rose Bowl, one of them is bound to win it, right? I mean someone has to win!

acl65pilot

Like I said, lets answer the "IF" first.

Bucking Bar

Alpha's 99.0% right. Close enough that maybe the distinction is not worth making, so I'll only add...

Theoretically labor could get a Single Transportation System finding from the NMB which spanned multiple Companies. That is how the law is written to function. A single list can span multiple companies. Ideally ALPA could take pilot wages out of the competitive equation by seeking mergers of all pilots within the "Delta Brand."

Realistically, the NMB has been VERY biased and sided with management on Trans State's battle to stop GoJets. Teamsters sided with management and helped alter ego GoJets defeat ALPA's attempt at doing the right thing. The precedent from GoJets is that subverting a mainline scope clause itself is sufficient justification to operate an alter ego airline.

If that precedent stands (as I guess it would until members of the NMB are replaced under Obama) then management can simply use scope clauses to justify alter ego entities that divide labor up into manageable (ineffective) pieces. My instant opinion (without looking into NWA's agreements in detail) is that the distinction in flow through agreements, as they relate to scope (ie the differences between LOA2006-8 and 2006-10) might be sufficient grounds to deny a Single Carrier petition under the NMB as things stand.
If the law worked as designed, I would argue there is greater integration between Compass and Delta than Compass and Comair. Where my Italian auto aficionado gets it wrong is that the NMB looks more to management, scheduling, control, and if the product is held out as a single "brand" than whether they operate the same airplanes.

After all, other than the 757, where was the overlap with NorthWest?

Under the guidelines written into the 1926 act and 1934 amendments there is more reason to find ASA as a single carrier with Delta than Comair. After all, who's ticket are the passengers holding? Who "manages" the brand and who sets the flying schedule? Who really has operational control of "Delta" ?

The NMB has been in a virtual coma.

flycrj200

Good luck on that one.

I hope it happens, I need a job