Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-23-2010, 06:42 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
What kind of improvements do you want to scope?
We may be able to tighten up the language. Make it 100% certain about the number of 70/76 seat RJs. But we will never take back an airplane that has been outsourced.
If you expect that we will, you are setting yourself up for a big letdown.
We may be able to tighten up the language. Make it 100% certain about the number of 70/76 seat RJs. But we will never take back an airplane that has been outsourced.
If you expect that we will, you are setting yourself up for a big letdown.
Fo reals though, pick the nearest 2-3 outsource contracts with 76 seaters that is up next and say the day its up that flying drops dead (as far as being outsourced goes...they can ALWAYS do it themselves). Also by that date, all 76 seaters must be returned to 70 seats or less. Cost: cancelling contracts that are already expired: zero. Pulling 6 seats out of 150ish jets (minus the jets already cancelled): doubt its that much at all and no one really seriously claims it is.
Theres an extremely generous compromise on scope. FAR more generous than necessary. It takes into account the fact that we don't want to pay for full scope restoration all at once. But we can afford to draw the line from 76 down to 70 and no one can seriously say it will break the bank.
And who knows, once we cost out the elimination of 51+ seat scope concessions (especially if UAL is successful) then we "me too" it and move on. Its not like outsourced RJs are the foundation of the entire company. They represent a huge portion of lost mainline jobs, but an extremely tiny portion of system seat miles. The rest of the system can ammortize that without breaking the bank.
09-23-2010, 06:50 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
This is NOT possible. Any sort of ALPA National push for recapturing of the flying will bring DFR suits from the lifers at the regionals. We've seen this before, and now National (AND DALPA) is so parayized by the threat of lawsuits, that you will NEVER see a push for this.
RJ Lifers are entitled to fly as many planes of any size as they want for whatever they want to fly them for. They can get A380's any time their company wants and they can low bid to get the flying. But it will be on their own and not for a mainline unless the mainline pilots aproove it, and there is a 99.999999999% chance they won't be around for long ala IndyAir.
Call the bluff. Move the line in the sand towards us for a change. It will not break the bank and there is no ground for a lawsuit which would be a lot cheaper to fight anyway than the thousands of lost mainline jobs have cost us collectively as a profession.
09-23-2010, 07:00 PM
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
So. Do it anyway. Last lawsuit didn't accomplish jack squat. And we can sue on a DFR because regionals have scope that prevents us from doing THEIR flying (and yes, they do have such scope). Why aren't we allowed to do as much ASA or CHQ flying as we want, for whatever rates we want? It's not fair! Waaaaaaaaaaaa!
RJ Lifers are entitled to fly as many planes of any size as they want for whatever they want to fly them for. They can get A380's any time their company wants and they can low bid to get the flying. But it will be on their own and not for a mainline unless the mainline pilots aproove it, and there is a 99.999999999% chance they won't be around for long ala IndyAir.
Call the bluff. Move the line in the sand towards us for a change. It will not break the bank and there is no ground for a lawsuit which would be a lot cheaper to fight anyway than the thousands of lost mainline jobs have cost us collectively as a profession.
RJ Lifers are entitled to fly as many planes of any size as they want for whatever they want to fly them for. They can get A380's any time their company wants and they can low bid to get the flying. But it will be on their own and not for a mainline unless the mainline pilots aproove it, and there is a 99.999999999% chance they won't be around for long ala IndyAir.
Call the bluff. Move the line in the sand towards us for a change. It will not break the bank and there is no ground for a lawsuit which would be a lot cheaper to fight anyway than the thousands of lost mainline jobs have cost us collectively as a profession.
09-23-2010, 07:06 PM
Doesn't Get Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,598
Well lets play with this for a little bit. First a question that you can answer and I will answer first.
How long do you think it will take to negotiate a restoration pwa. (60-70% increase) IMHO at least five years. So with that assumption lets go from there.
Get a 20-30% raise on day one of a contract that takes less than a year to negotiate and is effective on Jan 1, 2013 or the amendable date. Add five percent a year for four year. (Same date you would at the earliest get a contract for a 40-70% gain)
So 30 yr 1, 35 yr 2, 40 yr 3, 45 yr four, over 2012 book rates. Now compile that money earned and compare it to what you will have made waiting for four to five years for a contract that may get to total restoration. Add in the extra retirement money along the way. Which one puts more money in your pocket?
Of course if you can force the company to give 100 percent restoration you will have 1) done something most associations have never done, and 2) The above example does not matter.
There are many ways to get to the same point in the same amount of time. It is the time value money approach. Just a thought and I am not suggesting anything. Just offering a counter point for the sake of discussion. You also would be back in section six again at the same point you would have been completing the first round.
I believe that every section six you have gotten just that from your union. Give it time buddy.
For argument's sake.
I am not sure the goal is for management to respect us. We are a line item on a balance sheet. We are needed but we are a cost. Everything is a cost right down to the water we carry on our jets.
I believe it is for the financial institutions to notice us and take note of our cooperative bearing towards the company. They have grown to liking it, and want our opinions.
I also think that the idea of working together is so that two basic things happen. 1) Our company is successful and we are seen internally and externally as a part of it (PR) and 2) With a successful and profitable entity where everyone gains whereas everyone loses with a company that is bleeding all over the balance sheet. Think of the SWA effect in reverse.
I also beleive that our company and specifically Flying Operations values the line pilots input and wants to give you as much support as possible to get the job done safely, with good customer service and as efficiently as possible. I suspect that if we maintain our profitability and things go our way leading towards 2012 we have a better than average change of getting significant restoration. It may not be total restoration as you see it, but it will a far cry from where we have been a few short years ago. No one is selling anyone short. As I have said, it is far to distant to set our demands or desires in stone. We are still in a very fluid situation.
There may come a time to dump this approach but this approach has not stood the test of section six. If it seems to be failing we always have our old ways to fall back on, don't we?
I am not asking you to subscribe to any of this. I am asking you to read it, digest it and think about it.
How long do you think it will take to negotiate a restoration pwa. (60-70% increase) IMHO at least five years. So with that assumption lets go from there.
Get a 20-30% raise on day one of a contract that takes less than a year to negotiate and is effective on Jan 1, 2013 or the amendable date. Add five percent a year for four year. (Same date you would at the earliest get a contract for a 40-70% gain)
So 30 yr 1, 35 yr 2, 40 yr 3, 45 yr four, over 2012 book rates. Now compile that money earned and compare it to what you will have made waiting for four to five years for a contract that may get to total restoration. Add in the extra retirement money along the way. Which one puts more money in your pocket?
Of course if you can force the company to give 100 percent restoration you will have 1) done something most associations have never done, and 2) The above example does not matter.
There are many ways to get to the same point in the same amount of time. It is the time value money approach. Just a thought and I am not suggesting anything. Just offering a counter point for the sake of discussion. You also would be back in section six again at the same point you would have been completing the first round.
I believe that every section six you have gotten just that from your union. Give it time buddy.
For argument's sake.
I am not sure the goal is for management to respect us. We are a line item on a balance sheet. We are needed but we are a cost. Everything is a cost right down to the water we carry on our jets.
I believe it is for the financial institutions to notice us and take note of our cooperative bearing towards the company. They have grown to liking it, and want our opinions.
I also think that the idea of working together is so that two basic things happen. 1) Our company is successful and we are seen internally and externally as a part of it (PR) and 2) With a successful and profitable entity where everyone gains whereas everyone loses with a company that is bleeding all over the balance sheet. Think of the SWA effect in reverse.
I also beleive that our company and specifically Flying Operations values the line pilots input and wants to give you as much support as possible to get the job done safely, with good customer service and as efficiently as possible. I suspect that if we maintain our profitability and things go our way leading towards 2012 we have a better than average change of getting significant restoration. It may not be total restoration as you see it, but it will a far cry from where we have been a few short years ago. No one is selling anyone short. As I have said, it is far to distant to set our demands or desires in stone. We are still in a very fluid situation.
There may come a time to dump this approach but this approach has not stood the test of section six. If it seems to be failing we always have our old ways to fall back on, don't we?
I am not asking you to subscribe to any of this. I am asking you to read it, digest it and think about it.
ACL is 110% right here. I hope we have a new contract to vote on by Dec 31, 2012 that has a three year amendable date and a good chip out of the restoration block. Get another contract to vote on by Dec 31, 2015 that has another good chunk out of the block and an amendable date three years later. By 2018 we'll be back. I know it's a decade after it went away, but it took far longer than a decade to build up to C2K. If we go for too much, we'll still be fighting in 2015 working under the contract we have now.
09-23-2010, 07:07 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I interpret a “don’t show your cards” approach by DALPA when it comes to everything but especially scope, I get it. It just requires a lot of trust knowing that our 9, 88 and possibly 320 fleets are on the line and that runs up and down our seniority list and would affect everybody. Junior 88 Captains are mid to high 7ER FOs, if they get displaced they’re headed back there and everyone can move down or out.
Some aren’t willing to give that trust based on previous experience, some are, hence the debate for years now on this thread alone.
But many of us are looking at National and wondering whose side are they on, mainline pilots or regional lifers when it comes to scope? You can’t have both.
People are looking for a leader within a national organization that doesn't allow it and they are annoyed, and rightfully so.
Some aren’t willing to give that trust based on previous experience, some are, hence the debate for years now on this thread alone.
But many of us are looking at National and wondering whose side are they on, mainline pilots or regional lifers when it comes to scope? You can’t have both.
People are looking for a leader within a national organization that doesn't allow it and they are annoyed, and rightfully so.
09-23-2010, 07:11 PM
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
09-23-2010, 07:12 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
So. Do it anyway. Last lawsuit didn't accomplish jack squat. And we can sue on a DFR because regionals have scope that prevents us from doing THEIR flying (and yes, they do have such scope). Why aren't we allowed to do as much ASA or CHQ flying as we want, for whatever rates we want? It's not fair! Waaaaaaaaaaaa!
RJ Lifers are entitled to fly as many planes of any size as they want for whatever they want to fly them for. They can get A380's any time their company wants and they can low bid to get the flying. But it will be on their own and not for a mainline unless the mainline pilots aproove it, and there is a 99.999999999% chance they won't be around for long ala IndyAir.
Call the bluff. Move the line in the sand towards us for a change. It will not break the bank and there is no ground for a lawsuit which would be a lot cheaper to fight anyway than the thousands of lost mainline jobs have cost us collectively as a profession.
RJ Lifers are entitled to fly as many planes of any size as they want for whatever they want to fly them for. They can get A380's any time their company wants and they can low bid to get the flying. But it will be on their own and not for a mainline unless the mainline pilots aproove it, and there is a 99.999999999% chance they won't be around for long ala IndyAir.
Call the bluff. Move the line in the sand towards us for a change. It will not break the bank and there is no ground for a lawsuit which would be a lot cheaper to fight anyway than the thousands of lost mainline jobs have cost us collectively as a profession.
National doesn't have the balls to pull something like that. That is why we need national reform now.
Don't get me wrong, I'm generally pleased with the direction Moak has taken with proactive engagement. It is a very very fine line to dance, and he's done about as good a job as anyone can do.
The secrecy gets annoying and feeds mistrust, and I expect reward for working with the company and helping them return to profit in 2012.
I disagree with the level of militancy (is that a word?) that NuGuy typically takes. It's fatiguing and not worth my time, however we do agree that there needs to be reform.
09-23-2010, 07:13 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
When I say "I get it" I mean if I were DALPA MEC, when it came to scope, I'd hold the line and let the regional operators get eatten by their own costs and Delta's desire to "get out of the RJ business." I wouldn't make that known, I wouldn't want RAH and SKW making a move until their completely boxed in.
And I'd give National the middle finger whenever I could. But thats just me and Slow would never let me be in charge so this is all a mooo point.
And I'd give National the middle finger whenever I could. But thats just me and Slow would never let me be in charge so this is all a mooo point.
09-23-2010, 07:13 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: bartender
Posts: 295
09-23-2010, 07:14 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
I interpret a “don’t show your cards” approach by DALPA when it comes to everything but especially scope, I get it. It just requires a lot of trust knowing that our 9, 88 and possibly 320 fleets are on the line and that runs up and down our seniority list and would affect everybody. Junior 88 Captains are mid to high 7ER FOs, if they get displaced they’re headed back there and everyone can move down or out.
Some aren’t willing to give that trust based on previous experience, some are, hence the debate for years now on this thread alone.
But many of us are looking at National and wondering whose side are they on, mainline pilots or regional lifers when it comes to scope? You can’t have both.
People are looking for a leader within a national organization that doesn't allow it and they are annoyed, and rightfully so.
Some aren’t willing to give that trust based on previous experience, some are, hence the debate for years now on this thread alone.
But many of us are looking at National and wondering whose side are they on, mainline pilots or regional lifers when it comes to scope? You can’t have both.
People are looking for a leader within a national organization that doesn't allow it and they are annoyed, and rightfully so.
Funny... I was reading the 9E forums not long ago and they were saying that ALPA is a mainline only union and can't serve two masters thus can't be trusted.
Try to please everyone and you can't please anyone...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
