Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-12-2011, 01:38 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
That jackrabbit has a hell of a radar. My buddy, posts here, used to work at a marina at Lake Martin in Alabama. I guess the B1s did a lot of bombing runs on the dam and he said he'd heard B1s but never saw one because they were long gone by then. Except one day he was looking in the right direction and caught site of one. So that's a hell of a good rabbit.
07-12-2011, 01:44 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
As far as I know, the review was completed back in May and reported at the MEC Meeting that month. This is from an update I received from my LEC after the MEC Meeting:
"Republic Air Holdings (RAH) Scope Issue
This is obviously a contentious issue for a majority of our pilots. During the MEC meeting, we had a very detailed briefing from our DALPA legal staff that explained the current scope language and how holding companies, such as RAH, fit into that language. A vigorous debate took place both in Delegate Committee and in plenary session. We accept the fact that RAH, as it is currently structured, does not violate the scope language in the PWA as currently written."
"Republic Air Holdings (RAH) Scope Issue
This is obviously a contentious issue for a majority of our pilots. During the MEC meeting, we had a very detailed briefing from our DALPA legal staff that explained the current scope language and how holding companies, such as RAH, fit into that language. A vigorous debate took place both in Delegate Committee and in plenary session. We accept the fact that RAH, as it is currently structured, does not violate the scope language in the PWA as currently written."
I agree as of right now our weak section 1 allows RAH to continue as is which also gives permission for Skywest, Trans States and all others of RAH like minds to pursue the holdings company scope violation loophole. Delta is subsidizing Frontier right now, that needs to end.
That's why it's sad that SWA management, SWAPA and SWA pilots get to share a mutual mission while we try to convince our union to stop allowing the company to replace us with our own competition. As long as DCI continues with RJs we will never get to share a mutual mission but rather simply fight bitterly for the jobs we already have.
07-12-2011, 01:56 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Ferd;
Nobody has a crystal ball on specific stock price, but below 9 IMO DAL is a buy. To be a truly successful investor, you have to stop being greedy on the upside and in denial on the downside.
07-12-2011, 02:32 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
07-12-2011, 03:02 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Permanently scarred
Posts: 1,707
07-12-2011, 03:08 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
But what about the look at the definition of air carrier and pursue making a holdings company an STS blah blah. I heard they have decided not to do that, just trying to get verification that we won't try and pursue STS.
I agree as of right now our weak section 1 allows RAH to continue as is which also gives permission for Skywest, Trans States and all others of RAH like minds to pursue the holdings company scope violation loophole. Delta is subsidizing Frontier right now, that needs to end.
That's why it's sad that SWA management, SWAPA and SWA pilots get to share a mutual mission while we try to convince our union to stop allowing the company to replace us with our own competition. As long as DCI continues with RJs we will never get to share a mutual mission but rather simply fight bitterly for the jobs we already have.
I agree as of right now our weak section 1 allows RAH to continue as is which also gives permission for Skywest, Trans States and all others of RAH like minds to pursue the holdings company scope violation loophole. Delta is subsidizing Frontier right now, that needs to end.
That's why it's sad that SWA management, SWAPA and SWA pilots get to share a mutual mission while we try to convince our union to stop allowing the company to replace us with our own competition. As long as DCI continues with RJs we will never get to share a mutual mission but rather simply fight bitterly for the jobs we already have.
Either:
- The original lawyers did a poor job
- The current lawyers aren't good enough to get results
- There is a lack of interest in pursuing legal action
Cheers
George
07-12-2011, 03:17 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: A-320/A
Posts: 588
If the same lawyer team that helped craft Section 1 now advises us that the language is weak, something is amiss....
Either:
Cheers
George
Either:
- The original lawyers did a poor job
- The current lawyers aren't good enough to get results
- There is a lack of interest in pursuing legal action
Cheers
George
Chuck
07-12-2011, 03:33 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Urban chicken rancher.
Posts: 6,070
07-12-2011, 03:35 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
07-12-2011, 03:38 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
1) Recall your reps and put reps in that will do something about it. (Easier said than done.)
2) Get ALPA National to fire their current lawyers and replace them with competent ones. (Yeah, right.)
3) Get resolutions passed in most or all of the LEC's directing the MEC to pursue this legally. (Can you say, "received", or "we'll look into that and get back to you?")
4) Replace ALPA with different representation that is not afraid to argue matters of principle and will direct their attorneys to pursue this and will not accept failures with ineffective contract language. (Again, easier said than done.)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
