Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-28-2011, 04:29 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
fwiw the "sigh" seemingly comes from the NMB. Please remember that the IBT brought this issue forward to the NMB about RAH STS for one narrow purpose knowing full well the ramifications to their pilots if the NMB ruled STS for RAH when it came to scope clauses.
Now quick rehash, here is what the NMB said about STS in general in the RAH ruling:
1. the Board cited the following indicia of a single transportation system:
Now look at what the NMB said about RAH:
1. Ownership6. Conclusion
a. In Trans World Airlines/Ozark Airlines, [W]hether a combined schedule is published; how the carrier advertises its services; whether reservation systems are combined; whether tickets are issued on one carrier’s stock; if signs, logos and other publicly visible indicia have been changed to indicate only one carrier’s existence; whether personnel with public contact were held out as employees of one carrier; and whether the process of repainting planes and other equipment, to eliminate indications of separate existence, has been progressed. 38 NMB No. 39 - 154 –
b. Other factors investigated by the Board seek to determine if the carriers have combined their operations from a managerial and labor relations perspective. Here the Board investigates whether labor relations and personnel functions are handled by one carrier; whether there are a common management, common corporate officers and interlocking Boards of Directors; whether there is a combined workforce; and whether separate identities are maintained for corporate and other purposes.
c. 14 NMB 218, 236 (1987).
2. The Board finds a single transportation system only when there is substantial integration of operations, financial control, and labor and personnel functions. a. Northwest Airlines, Inc./Delta Air Lines, Inc., 37 NMB 88 (2009);
b. Florida N. R.R, 34 NMB 142 (2007);
c. GoJet Airlines, LLC and Trans States Airlines, Inc., 33 NMB 24 (2005);
d. Burlington N. Santa Fe Ry. Co., 32 NMB 163 (2005).
3. Further, the Board has noted that a substantial degree of overlapping ownership, senior management, and Boards of Directors is critical to finding a single transportation system. b. Florida N. R.R, 34 NMB 142 (2007);
c. GoJet Airlines, LLC and Trans States Airlines, Inc., 33 NMB 24 (2005);
d. Burlington N. Santa Fe Ry. Co., 32 NMB 163 (2005).
a. Precision Valley Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Precision Airlines and Valley Flying Serv., Inc., d/b/a Northeast Express Reg’l Airlines, 20 NMB 619 (1993).
4. The Board’s substantial integration of operations criteria does not, however, require total integration of operations. a. Allegheny Airlines, Inc. and Piedmont Airlines, Inc., 32 NMB 21, 28 (2004).
5. Labor relations are often indicia of single transportation systems. a. See Atlas Air, Inc./Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc., 35 NMB 259, 269 (2008) (single system found in spite of separate operating certificates due in part to substantial overlap among Boards of Directors and senior managers).
6. …Consolidation of senior managers, personnel functions, and labor relations are often indicia of single transportation systems. (sort of repeat)a. See Atlas Air, Inc./Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc., 35 NMB 259, 269 (2008) (single system found in spite of separate operating certificates due in part to substantial overlap among Boards of Directors and senior managers).
7. …the Board found a single transportation system to exist primarily because of the significant degree of “common control”: a. In Flagship Airlines, Inc., 22 NMB 331 (1995), a case with facts very similar to those present here, the Board found a single transportation system to exist primarily because of the significant degree of “common control” exercised by Eagle over its subsidiaries. Id. at 426. Eagle wholly-owned and centrally controlled the four subsidiaries; there existed interlocking boards of directors, common corporate officers, and common management; the carriers held themselves out to the public as a single carrier, and flight schedules and reservations were integrated; and while most employee groups were represented by separate organizations/CBAs, Eagle handled most other labor.
Now look at what the NMB said about RAH:
1. Ownership
a. All subsidiaries are wholly owned by RAH, but each holds its own FAA operating certificate.8 Management between the Carriers has already been integrated.
2. Managementa. The same Board of Directors and senior management team oversee all of the Carriers.
b. Bryan Bedford is the Chairman and CEO for all of the Carriers. He is also the President of RA, Shuttle, Chautauqua, and Frontier.9
c. Robert H. (Hal) Cooper is the Executive Vice President, CFO, Treasurer and Secretary
d. Wayne Heller is the Executive Vice President, COO for all the Carriers.
e. Ron Henson is the Vice President, Labor Relations
f. Kathy Wooldridge is the Vice President, Human Resources, for all the Carriers.
3. Controlb. Bryan Bedford is the Chairman and CEO for all of the Carriers. He is also the President of RA, Shuttle, Chautauqua, and Frontier.9
c. Robert H. (Hal) Cooper is the Executive Vice President, CFO, Treasurer and Secretary
d. Wayne Heller is the Executive Vice President, COO for all the Carriers.
e. Ron Henson is the Vice President, Labor Relations
f. Kathy Wooldridge is the Vice President, Human Resources, for all the Carriers.
a. RAH exercises control over the management, labor relations, and human resources functions of all of its subsidiaries including Pilot recruitment.
4. Marketinga. RAH holds out to the public that the Carriers are part of a consolidated entity as shown at its website, Republic Airways.
5. Schedulinga. While RAH’s business model is one that includes both “fixed-fee” and “branded” operations, its operations are consolidated and “branded” operations are commonly-scheduled under the Frontier brand.
i. For example, the route map available at Frontier and RAH’s websites provides that: “Flights are operated by Frontier, Lynx, Republic Airways, or Chautauqua Airlines.” In addition, RAH’s subsidiaries are presented on a consolidated basis for both financial reporting and operating performance. See Quarterly Financial Statement, August 9, 2010; September 2010 Press Release “Republic Airways Reports September 2010 Traffic.”
a. This type of consolidation of senior managers, personnel functions, and labor relations are often indicia of single transportation systems. See Atlas Air, Inc./Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc., 35 NMB 259, 269 (2008) (single system found in spite of separate operating certificates due in part to substantial overlap among Boards of Directors and senior managers).
b. RAH exercises control over the management, labor relations, and human resources functions of all of its subsidiaries including Pilot recruitment. Further, RAH holds out to the public that the Carriers are part of a consolidated entity as shown at its website, Republic Airways. While RAH’s business model is one that includes both “fixed-fee” and “branded” operations, its operations are consolidated and “branded” operations are commonly-scheduled under the Frontier brand. For example, the route map available at Frontier and RAH’s websites provides that: “Flights are operated by Frontier, Lynx, Republic Airways, or Chautauqua Airlines.” In addition, RAH’s subsidiaries are presented on a consolidated basis for both financial reporting and operating performance. See Quarterly Financial Statement, August 9, 2010; September 2010 Press Release “Republic Airways Reports September 2010 Traffic.”
b. RAH exercises control over the management, labor relations, and human resources functions of all of its subsidiaries including Pilot recruitment. Further, RAH holds out to the public that the Carriers are part of a consolidated entity as shown at its website, Republic Airways. While RAH’s business model is one that includes both “fixed-fee” and “branded” operations, its operations are consolidated and “branded” operations are commonly-scheduled under the Frontier brand. For example, the route map available at Frontier and RAH’s websites provides that: “Flights are operated by Frontier, Lynx, Republic Airways, or Chautauqua Airlines.” In addition, RAH’s subsidiaries are presented on a consolidated basis for both financial reporting and operating performance. See Quarterly Financial Statement, August 9, 2010; September 2010 Press Release “Republic Airways Reports September 2010 Traffic.”
Last edited by forgot to bid; 05-28-2011 at 04:41 AM.
05-28-2011, 04:36 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Good question, I would also like to know the exact "legal" answer to this.
The conspiracy-theorist side of me tends to think it has something to do with ALPA courting the Republic pilots. Though my mind isn't settled as far as the DALPA vs. ALPA thing goes, it angers me as a union member to see ALPA being less supportive to the pilots it is supposed to support in exchange for chasing new groups.
The conspiracy-theorist side of me tends to think it has something to do with ALPA courting the Republic pilots. Though my mind isn't settled as far as the DALPA vs. ALPA thing goes, it angers me as a union member to see ALPA being less supportive to the pilots it is supposed to support in exchange for chasing new groups.
I dont understand it either, but suspect the courting of RAH is only a tiny piece of the reason. In the game of hardball, if you really wanted to bring RAH into the ALPA fold, you would force the issue...by pushing against them. I think this due the relatively new ALPA policy manual requirement that both mainline and connection carriers get to make their input prior to any mainline scope changes. RAH isn't ALPA and is not afforded this benefit. Therefore, if ALPA was courting RAH, they would make every effort to marginalize them until they joined...just my opinion.
In contrast, I think the issue isn't being forced for other reasons, none of which have to do with our actual scope language. To see it thru my eyes, you have to believe ALPA is not your watchdog...as an example, the increased gross weight issue of one of our DCI's about 1.5-2 years ago. The pushback from ALPA against enforcing this, or even investigating it, against the individual pilot who broke the story...if the rumors are true, was quite amazing.
Income streams-cut out RAH, you cut out a hunk of feed, incur lawsuits and early contract termination fees. You cause angst in management to fill the gaps, you park airplanes which we basically funded thru the shell game and you breathe new life into Comair...in many ways...heaven forbid
.Airline management collusion. On the sundrenched beaches somewhere, these guys plot their way forward. They devise elaborate plans which skirt ALPA contract language, use the minimum pilot required for insurance, and pay as little as possible for services in order to maintain control of the various workforces. It is such an elaborate web of shell games, I dont think a cray computer could tell you (if it ever happened) whether you were flying struck work or not. In other words which code is on which ticket and who owns the flying. Management doesnt want to lose control of their network and by not enforcing section 1 we are rewarding them.
ALPA and the stockholm syndrome. In an effort not to kill the golden goose, we are forced to walk a tightrope. The more time spent walking the tightrope, the more our reps begin to see things thru managements eyes. This is why we are told things like "we can't..." "we will lose..." etc. It is human nature. Do you think management does not know it is human nature? When ALPA goes native, we do have the recall process, but that hasn't been invoked too often...in fact, the opposite is more true. Those that WONT go native are asked to leave.
I am not even scratching the surface of what could be going on here, but I'm a slow typist who can ramble and lose my train of thought. Money and control are central to the scope issue. Everything else IMO is fluff.
I am a Delta pilot. I want a successful company. I want a strong bargaining agent. I want a great contract that allows me to put away my second career. I want management to be successful. I think some constructive engagement is essential. I want to retire with dignity. I disagree completely with our stance on section 1.
05-28-2011, 04:47 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
As to DALPA and RAH. What I hope, really hope, is that DALPA will actually try to kill two stones with one bird here.
Don't just go after RAH because you will only have to do it again when Skywest goes for this multi-certificate branded flying gig or TransStates/Compass does.
So get a NMB ruling that makes multi-certificates automatically STS.
Fall back, beat RAH down like Nick Fairley on a UGA QB:
Don't just go after RAH because you will only have to do it again when Skywest goes for this multi-certificate branded flying gig or TransStates/Compass does.
So get a NMB ruling that makes multi-certificates automatically STS.
Fall back, beat RAH down like Nick Fairley on a UGA QB:
05-28-2011, 06:24 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Airline management collusion. On the sundrenched beaches somewhere, these guys plot their way forward. They devise elaborate plans which skirt ALPA contract language, use the minimum pilot required for insurance, and pay as little as possible for services in order to maintain control of the various workforces.....
AIR Conference - Airline Industrial Relations Conference
Check out who the members are. (Everybody.)
05-28-2011, 06:36 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: LAX 350 A
Posts: 564
Back when I got hired at DL, we used to get connecting gates throuh ACARS. We would give it to the FAs to read. Then they had the information sent directly to the monitors on the planes as we began the descent. Then they turned it all off, and instituted the "Check the monitors in the terminal and with a uniformed gate agent" fiasco. Now we're back to where we were apparently.
Back when I was at a commuter, 15 years ago, we put our landings in ACARS. DAL can't/wont spend the labor to have some dude in India hack the code for it.
BTW: what's up with the North's 757-300 ACARS? I'm getting Corpus Tunnel from all the keystrokes required just to get ATIS and incoming messages.
05-28-2011, 07:36 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: LAX ERA
Posts: 3,457
Lot less button push'en go'en on
05-28-2011, 08:05 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: LAX 350 A
Posts: 564
Figures Delta would add their touch of "technology." I guess an iCrew and Travelnet app for iPhone and Adroid is no where in the future? AA and UAL/CAL have this. I sent an AA link to our Delta Technology department for their review. Their response, WOW, simple, clean, fast, but we don't have the resources to make one for us. Like there are any seats anywhere anyway...
BD
05-28-2011, 08:17 AM
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Posts: 1,069
05-28-2011, 08:50 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
I don't think I said anything close to what you're putting forth. Simply that if you look at the amount of money generated from a typical flight the expense of crew is comes in right above the bottled water. But hey, don't consider it; look at it all from the eyes of management and be happy with that perspective if you prefer.
Good grief Alice. I just wanna know where you get all the numbers that make up the profitability or lack thereof which you used to do your back of the napkin math to state that the flight is profitable. Show me your work. Other than that, it's just weak conjecture on your part that the flight is profitable, much less that it is raking in money. Or I guess it could be that you have never heard of yield management?
05-28-2011, 09:25 AM
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
Management's argument:
How to Win Past Practice Grievances, Chapter One
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
