Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search

Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-14-2009, 05:06 PM
  #5601  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ERJ135's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: CR7 Capt
Posts: 1,621
Default

I'd suggest the DAL MEC should go and talk to APA ask them how well their flowbacks are being treated at Egl. With the big displacments back in late summer 08'. Those remaining flowbacks on property lost their capt seats at Eagle and have since been displaced to FO and retaining EGL seniority. So they're capts had their TWA seniority at egl before displacement. Many of them in the neigborhood of 10yrs. So the held 10yr egl capt pay at $80/hr . Now they're at 5yr egl fo pay assuming many been on property for 5yrs, that $39/hr. Many of these guys I flew where 767intl, making six figures, now they are a poverty level wages as a regional fo. Its just plain wrong IMO. APA set up a flowback fund to help support their famlies and such. Unfortunately APA is essentially powerless to do anything to help them. i hear they're trying. I wish them luck but, I think the DAL MEC should take a lesson here at making sure the DAL pilots are protected at CPZ in the event of a flowback situation. You don't want what has happened to AA FB's to happen to DAL guys.
ERJ135 is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 05:46 PM
  #5602  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Starboard Side, weekends & holidays.
Posts: 856
Default

Originally Posted by Lalo37
Youre the sensitive little b@$ch.
My comment was made to to be extreme and it's hilarious how all you retards jump. Guess what? Illegals are here to stay and that's not going to change.
I took offense to how "Buzzpat" threw that comment out out of nowhere. It doesn't matter if I'm Mexican or not. I'm actually african american. What does getting a medical have to do with illegals? Again, they are here to stay no matter how much you little guys wanna complain. And they or I will not leave "Cali". There are bigger fish to fry but you white conservatives always want to point the finger at "Illegals" as the root of all the problems. Try getting your wife to do the jobs they do.......
Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce you to Mr. Speedbird_34 of Flightinfo.com fame. Ignoring this particular specimen will do your blood pressure and general well-being good in the long run.
FmrFreightDog is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 05:57 PM
  #5603  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 798
Default

DALPA has to stop negotiating away your scope language.


Midwest is an example of a pilot group (lead by ALPA national) negotiating holes in the scope language and having to pay the price.
MD80 is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 06:17 PM
  #5604  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Vikz09's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: M88 B
Posts: 399
Default

Originally Posted by slowplay
Detroit and MSP add up to about the same number of roll call votes combined as Atlanta. For once, there'll have to be consensus among the 25 Reps, as the roll call and small base votes have been diluted with the addition of the additional representatives.

Proxies weren't allowed as this resolution wasn't an agenda item. Had it been an agenda item the attendance probably would have been a lot higher and the results somewhat different. Realizing that different folks can look at a set of facts and come to a different conclusion, it's my opinion that the misinformation spread on this issue by the resolution's proponents has been astounding.

My question is why would anyone vote for a resolution that would add more pilots to a seniority list without owning the flying they supposedly bring? What were the 24 thinking?

It's suspicious when one of the primary proponents of the original resolution was an RJDC initial member. It's suspicious when inaccurate information about the CPZ interview process is proclaimed as fact. It's suspicious when many that support the original resolution came from ASA, CMR and regional airline management.

Hopefully the edited resolution will empower the MEC to conclusively point to the strategic errors the original resolution embodied, and to set a course for all Delta pilots that will address real scope concerns rather than this infection producing piecemeal approach.

what inaccurate information is it that you speak of regarding the compass interview. Ask me I will tell you exactly about it. Was one of the first to interview and the interview we went thru was identical to the NWA interview when they were hiring. IN FACT it was more thourgh. How do I know? My friends wife was the HR specialist who interviewed the last 150 pilots hired at NWA. My buddy and I were int the first few Compass Classes and only went there because we were told the way to NWA was thru Compass. While in Montreal finishing up our types.. his wife called and told us NWA was going to hire to cover there summer schedule and in fact she was shifted over to do the Pilot interviews. Believe me when I say, I had friends who couldn't get the Compass interview in the first month or two. fortunatly for them when they didn't get the Compass interview because NWA started interviewing 2 month's after I got hired and 4 people I know who wanted to get Compass interviews (but didn't have as much time, experience, etc.) ended up getting jobs at NWA.... Oh and by the way there interview was almost the same minus no simulator. Yes I Had to fly a 727 around the sky's my buddies now at NWA/DELTA did NOT. I assume you feel like you are better then anybody at Compass?
Vikz09 is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 06:24 PM
  #5605  
Gets Weekends Off
 
buzzpat's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Urban chicken rancher.
Posts: 6,070
Default

Originally Posted by FmrFreightDog
Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce you to Mr. Speedbird_34 of Flightinfo.com fame. Ignoring this particular specimen will do your blood pressure and general well-being good in the long run.
Ahhh, ok. Thanks for the PIREP.
buzzpat is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 06:44 PM
  #5606  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Default

Originally Posted by NuGuy
This same resolution is going to be passed at MEM, MSP and DTW. In DTW, it is actually an announced agenda item, so proxies will be permitted.
The resolution that passed in ATL wasn't similar to the resolution passed in MSP. One of the resolutions being put forward in DTW is completely different, demanding a 2 year timeline to integrate ALL ALPA represented connection carriers under the title "mainline flying restoration."

Only problem is, none of these resolutions describe a path to achieving their desired results. At least the ATL resolution called for study of the consequences.
slowplay is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 06:50 PM
  #5607  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Default

Originally Posted by Fly4hire
Slow,

Are you intentionally mixing apples and oranges in order to kill the idea? No one disagrees that integration without resolving (rolling back) 76 seat limits is dangerous.

The resolution was to "study and evaluate" possible integration, and in the mean time simply not change the representational structure. Ditto MSP.
Are you intentionally being disingenous in order to advance an agenda? The only outcome of the MSP resolution involved single seniority lists. The DTW mainline flying recapture resolution goes a lot farther. You are correct that the ATL resolution does involve studying the issue, which I'm ok with. Maybe there will be a magic bullet someplace, but as this idea has been studied to death and litigated by different parties I'm not very hopeful.
slowplay is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 07:22 PM
  #5608  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Fly4hire's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Left, left, left right left....
Posts: 911
Default

Originally Posted by slowplay
Are you intentionally being disingenous in order to advance an agenda? The only outcome of the MSP resolution involved single seniority lists. The DTW mainline flying recapture resolution goes a lot farther. You are correct that the ATL resolution does involve studying the issue, which I'm ok with. Maybe there will be a magic bullet someplace, but as this idea has been studied to death and litigated by different parties I'm not very hopeful.
The MSP resolution was to maintain representational staus quo. The ATL one said the same thing in a somewhat convoluted way. There will be a number of DTW resolutions, and the one you are referring to is from a CPS pilot who is a whack job and does not enjoy the support of his own pilot group, let alone the DAL-N pilots. It could always pass, but I'm not holding my breath - why don't we see what actually comes out of DTW

Either way the MEC can sort them out. The only thing reasonable people are asking for is to keep the representational status quo lest we unintentionally frak something up we don't yet comprehend (some of us any ways).

Integration is pie-in-the sky until: we roll back 76 seat limits, address pay, and the company wants to.

In the mean time CPS on our MEC is protection for DAL pilots and jobs, and future leverage. Why would we want to just give that away?
Fly4hire is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 10:17 PM
  #5609  
Can't abide NAI
 
Bucking Bar's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Default

Originally Posted by slowplay
Proxies weren't allowed as this resolution wasn't an agenda item. Had it been an agenda item the attendance probably would have been a lot higher and the results somewhat different. Realizing that different folks can look at a set of facts and come to a different conclusion, it's my opinion that the misinformation spread on this issue by the resolution's proponents has been astounding.

My question is why would anyone vote for a resolution that would add more pilots to a seniority list without owning the flying they supposedly bring? What were the 24 thinking?

It's suspicious when one of the primary proponents of the original resolution was an RJDC initial member. It's suspicious when inaccurate information about the CPZ interview process is proclaimed as fact. It's suspicious when many that support the original resolution came from ASA, CMR and regional airline management.

Hopefully the edited resolution will empower the MEC to conclusively point to the strategic errors the original resolution embodied, and to set a course for all Delta pilots that will address real scope concerns rather than this infection producing piecemeal approach.
Whatever. The resolution was sent to the Secretary Treasurer three weeks ahead of time, at least as week before the meeting notice (I got a CC of it) and was requested to be added to the Agenda. No notice was provided that this would not be on the Agenda. The LEC acted professionally, but clearly did not want the resolution. It was decided not to make an issue of the Agenda and as was, the resolution passed without raising the proxy issue.

There has been plenty of chatter on the web boards, so this wasn't exactly a stealthy resolution. Yes, had the item been on the Agenda the outcome would have been different. There would have been about another 20 votes cast in favor.

The reason so many former regional pilots are scope hawks are because their careers have been held back by rampant outsourcing of mainline jobs. They flew turboprops, but instead of being able to advance into mainline jets, those jets were outsourced. Now their upgrades will be pushed back an additional few years as the jets that were the traditional first Captain's seats go to regional pilots with nearly zero longevity. These pilots, like me, cringe when they hear their union say "76 seats is a good thing because those 6 additional seats bring in more revenue" and "Compass having costs 30% lower helps keep the other regionals in line." Apprently they miss the logic that these factors weigh against an investment in 100 seat jets at mainline.

You accuse others of misrepresentation, then you make statements like:
My question is why would anyone vote for a resolution that would add more pilots to a seniority list without owning the flying they supposedly bring? What were the 24 thinking?
The resolution asks the MEC to study the issue and report. How does that "add more pilots to the seniority list?"

I wonder why anyone would be against a resolution asking our MEC to evaluate ways to take some flying back and restore the concessionary scope bargaining done during bankrutcy. What's the worst that could happen?

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 03-14-2009 at 10:57 PM.
Bucking Bar is offline  
Old 03-14-2009, 10:38 PM
  #5610  
Can't abide NAI
 
Bucking Bar's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Default

Originally Posted by slowplay
You are correct that the ATL resolution does involve studying the issue, which I'm ok with. Maybe there will be a magic bullet someplace, but as this idea has been studied to death and litigated by different parties I'm not very hopeful.
Well, you're more moderate than you were a couple pages ago.

This idea has not been studied at all since bankruptcy. This is illustrated by comparing present day statements to management's talking points during the 1113 concessionary negotiations. One point is the cost of under wing support being too expensive to allow mainline to fly this type of operation, yet, Delta a reorganized most under wing support and in fact hired thousands of ASA employees who now are DGS folks who serve mainline and regional flights. Also consider that the Compass issue was not brought up, or negotiated during the JPWA dealings. There has not been a "trigger" to task ALPA's Experts with the job and those committees act under orders from the MEC, these Experts don't act independently.

I too am not optimistic the ATL resolution will have any effect because the bankruptcy scope negotiations are so entrenched. If leadership wanted those numbers, they would have asked for them during the JPWA negotiations.

My guess is taking the Compass scope back would be complex and difficult. It is much, much, easier to draw the line in the sand, push Compass over to the regional side and get the matter off everyone's desk. When Compass becomes another Comair, with its own representational and scope issues, it will be easy to blame the Compass pilots for the problems with Compass. They already have a Compass Coalition forming which will be the RJDC, revision 2.

None the less, it was right to speak up and challenge the status quo on this issue. It would be good to head this off at the pass. Some want to keep their ammo dry until just before Section 6 and ask for scope restoration then. If you are one of the pilots who wishes to bring that resolution at the "right" time, you'll certainly have my support.

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 03-14-2009 at 11:43 PM.
Bucking Bar is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22594
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices