LeineLodge

16,

you're killing me. Although the 1st may have been a man, the 2nd more
than makes up for it. Ha several friends make it over there this year an I'm wishing I could have gone. There's always next year.

Where is the AE? (too much serious discussion on the last few pages)

tsquare

I guess I see it as the organisation that not only enables the person to be ineffective, but effectively encourages it. I think we have already stomped the deceased equine, but it bears repeating that the same organisation that you seem to hold sacred is also unavailable to the proletariat. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anybody on any of these boards that are really satisfied with national yet they still thrive and prosper. Why? The non nuclear option of which you speak is a water pistol in Afghanistan.

acl65pilot

Cute Analogy there T

The single biggest difference is that I still see value in it and I am willing to give the process a chance. You may call that blind optimism, but I see it as a necessary step.

Sink r8

My interest in this is purely... photographic. I'm looking at Fraulein #2 (the one without an adam's apple). Must have been shooting in portrait mode, because in portrait, the intended subject is sharp and everything else (aka. "background") is blurry.

Nicely done!

capncrunch

Which ever guy you put in there, he will be obligated to represent the RJ pilots just as much as you. The conflict of interest will remain.

tsquare

OK.. we will agree to disagree. National has zero value IMHO. But my opinion is irrelevent, because nothing is gonna change. This will blow over like the PPA did, and we will be left with the same impotent money grabbing "leadership". Congratulations to pilots everywhere.

DAL 88 Driver

What about block hours? Number of seats? Number of pilots? Number of Delta passengers carried? City pairs that have changed from mostly mainline flights to RJ flights or vice versa?

Number of hulls only tells part of the story... especially when they have been parking smaller airplanes and replacing them with larger ones. Oh... and just to make sure we're talking about the same thing... you are talking about from the date Lee Moak took office to the present, right?

acl65pilot

T;
Whether this movement fails or succeeds one thing must be learned from it for another "uprising" not to occur. Change needs to happen. Even I strongly beleive that change at national must happen for its long term viability.

We may disagree on where we are in the lifecycle of ALPA, but we do not disagree with some of the finer points. The reality is that UAUA and DAL pilots are getting sick and tired of a lot and are contemplating a walk with with pocket books. I know that if this organization is as you say, they will realize that to survive they need to morph. The unionized labor there also better realize that with one or both pilots group leaving they will be without jobs. It is simply the same sort of reality that we faced a few years go. These people have been insulated to a greater degree than we have because they work for us.

All I have always said is there is value there, and I suspect that these people and this organization are politically savvy enough to read the cards correctly and will understand what is at stake. If they do not, the step you are advocating will occur out of a need greater than the risks involved.

gloopy

I would agree with that. However...

Obviously by far (if not the only) reason total RJ numbers are down is the unsuccessful business model of the current massive fleet of 50 seaters. As for the caps on larger RJ's, we should take little comfort in outsourcing caps that run right up to the currently allowable red line. What that means is if they could, there would be more (that goes for total frames of existing 70-76 seaters as well as, of course, anything larger). What that means, obviously, is that management is just now bumping up against the limits they agreed to previously, yet limits that for the entire history of this discussion have been slowly and methodically raised, in good times for a token bribe (which is usually taken away during the next bad times anyway) and in bad times for a slightly lesser lashing.

Then we have some guys claiming these limits mitigate furloughs, when in fact all they can possibly or conceivably do is to maybe mitigate some or all of the furloughs that their very existance would have paved the way for in the first place. And that's best case scenario, with a flow down, like Compass. Let's outsource all narrowbodies to Mesa, but with a flow, so that if anyone is furloughed they can flow. I just can't follow the logic of defending that philosophy, yet many employ it. The other scope concessions were flat out give aways that would at best contribute to and at worst directly cause furloughs by allowing management to do more and more Delta flying without Delta pilots.

Again, as to the bumping up against the limits of RJ outsourcing, we need to be very, very concerned about this. As in top tier issue. The history of RJ outsourcing has been one of constantly (although at some times slowly, at other times quickly) raised limits on total airframes as well as total seat count. Whenever you bump up against the newest limit (in this case total "large RJ" airframe limits, even if the total RJ count is down purely by anti-50 seater market forces) that is when you know you need to watch your back. Management clearly would LOVE to outsource more 70 and 76 seaters, and they would rev the engine and pop the clutch on the opportunity for anything larger. The fact that any such limits are being reached means that management will be right around the corner, in good times or in bad, to increase those limits. Count on it.

If they "have to" they will gladly write in a flow back. Pilot training costs is nothing compared to the glory of outsourcing more and more flying. And they will even give up "guaranteed ratios to mainline growth" if they have to, particularly when almost all such limits are one way check valves. But either is like agreeing to have someone cut a 6 inch gash in an artery (hey, we talked em down from 8) as long as they agree to stitch 2 inches of it right back up.

Management seeks every opportunity to raise scope limits in good times and in bad. Sec 6 negotiations and BK negotiations are their main windows of opportunity and they know one of them will be opening wide in the very near future. Now is the time to watch our backs, not only from management but from those sworn to serve and protect us as well.

acl65pilot

That is getting in to trade secret data that is protected by NDA. I am sure if can be data mined but the only public data you will get is city pairs, frequency and what is reported to the government on the 8 and 10-K's.

As I have stated, we are close or at the upper limit on allowable 70/76 seat airframes. This phenomenon that you see will no longer be allowed to occur without further scope sales. They can still replace 70 with 76 seat jets as our size allows, but they cannot go above the 255 total.

Pilot numbers have gone done, but depending on the NPRM they count may spike. That depends on a lot. Based upon current staffing models the number of pilots at DCI is going down. Go look at the airline data pages on this site.

ASM's are reported and as you say have gone up.

Total block hrs peaked at around 63% and have declined from that high water mark. I do not have the specific number in front of me but my guess is that it is in the mid to love 50's. Just a guess though.

I do not have public passenger data, and have not data mined number of seats and number of city pairs. It can be done though. I like you look at block hrs and airframes.

You know where I stand on scope, and it is my guess that another opportunity will present itself when the rest rules change the staffing requirements at these airlines and the CASM goes up even more. There will probably be a urge to put more seats in these jets due to these costs, and I am sure I know what our answer will be. Like I have said, I have no fear that our reps will do the correct thing, and that National will back our decision because frankly there is no way they cannot. We have leverage at national and frankly there is nothing in the by-laws that prohibit it.

On a greater level if I were ALPA President I would want more mainline pilots because they provide more money per pilot. It works in their best interest as well.