Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-27-2011, 10:53 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Doesn't matter anyway. Any Single Carrier problems can be easily whisked away with a new LOA or MOU.
Chucking REP out of the system does not agree with the "New World Order", where its really about what's good for ALL ALPA carriers, rather than any one carrier.
Mark my words...
Nu
Chucking REP out of the system does not agree with the "New World Order", where its really about what's good for ALL ALPA carriers, rather than any one carrier.
Mark my words...
Nu
02-27-2011, 11:05 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Nu;
It we all hope it is determined that they will achieve single carrier status. Tell me how you argue that the new entity is different than the old one?
There was language in the PWA (sans ACA days) that is no longer there. That language would have made the current and former corporate structure of RJET in violation the PWA Section One Single Carrier provisos.
It we all hope it is determined that they will achieve single carrier status. Tell me how you argue that the new entity is different than the old one?
There was language in the PWA (sans ACA days) that is no longer there. That language would have made the current and former corporate structure of RJET in violation the PWA Section One Single Carrier provisos.
02-27-2011, 11:35 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Flying the SEC
Posts: 2,350
I'm somebody! I got polled!
02-27-2011, 11:54 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,030
02-27-2011, 12:13 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,884
Nu;
It we all hope it is determined that they will achieve single carrier status. Tell me how you argue that the new entity is different than the old one?
There was language in the PWA (sans ACA days) that is no longer there. That language would have made the current and former corporate structure of RJET in violation the PWA Section One Single Carrier provisos.
It we all hope it is determined that they will achieve single carrier status. Tell me how you argue that the new entity is different than the old one?
There was language in the PWA (sans ACA days) that is no longer there. That language would have made the current and former corporate structure of RJET in violation the PWA Section One Single Carrier provisos.
We DO all hope that they get their single carrier status. What WAS in the contract is not really relevant.
In any event, a SC determination may or may not produce a problem for DAL with regards to section 1.
1) First we need the ALPA types to determine whether or not such a entity DOES violate section 1.
2) If so, then THEY need to decide if they want to do anything about it
3) If they do decide what they want to do something about it, they need to decide what.
4) At any point, you can bet the company will disagree with ALPA's interpretation, and say "grieve it", which may lead to an ALPA cave-in on any number of levels.
5) Even if you get as far as a grievace settlement, lawsuit award or whatever, that leads to the removal of REP aircraft from the DAL property, no big deal, as the room in section 1 that is created by the removal of the REP jets will simply allow another carrier to step in with replacement jets, probably within days of the award.
So you see, given the past performance, a SC determination leading to aircraft removed from the property means nothing in the long run.
You could, of course, as as part of the grievance settlement to reduce the number of permitted airframes, but good luck with that. You couldn't get the MEC to buy off on that, let alone the company.
Nu
02-27-2011, 12:46 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,101
Serve FC. But once coach passengers start to come down the jetway, throttle back and get people on. If someone in FC didn't get their drink in time, there's always going to be natural breaks in the passengers to serve them.
02-27-2011, 12:51 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Flying the SEC
Posts: 2,350
I've always wondered why we board BC 1st. It makes more sense to board from rear, less standing around. If I was a business man I would want to sit in the gate area with full connectivity vs sitting in the airplane while the people walk by bumping my elbow.
02-27-2011, 12:57 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,030
Heyas ACL,
We DO all hope that they get their single carrier status. What WAS in the contract is not really relevant.
In any event, a SC determination may or may not produce a problem for DAL with regards to section 1.
1) First we need the ALPA types to determine whether or not such a entity DOES violate section 1.
Nu
We DO all hope that they get their single carrier status. What WAS in the contract is not really relevant.
In any event, a SC determination may or may not produce a problem for DAL with regards to section 1.
1) First we need the ALPA types to determine whether or not such a entity DOES violate section 1.
Nu
This language was removed for two reasons:
(1) To increase competition among DCI carriersUnintended results
Just a reminder, Air Canada Jazz operates this ...- Increased competition resulted in lower costs among DCI carriers
- Savings from reduced feeder costs would result in more money for mainline bargaining
- Increased "bargaining credits" to be used to offset concessionary negotiations
- Since pilot costs are a controllable variable expense management attacked pilot wages and longevity at regional carriers
- Comair 5191 and Colgan 3407 had circumstances indicating career stresses were a contributing factor in both losses
- Regional losses were underwritten on Delta's ledger
- Expanded outsourced flying has resulted in fines from the DOT, lowered customer service rankings and spill over to competitors
- The hoped for reductions in expense never materialized and the negotiated offsets disappeared in subsequent concessionary bargaining
This was effective in making ASA, Comair and later Mesaba, Colgan and Compass marketable. SkyWest, Trans States and Republic all have aircraft on order (or in operation) which would have violated job protection provisions contained in our earlier pilot working agreements.
Not shabby for a "regional airline pilot" operation which was drawn outside mainline scope provisions ... .
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 02-27-2011 at 01:07 PM.
02-27-2011, 01:05 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
02-27-2011, 01:08 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
..... well, the free one anyway...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
