PilotFrog

I love it when the chainsaw comes out.

gloopy

I was totally going to do it but at the last minute I found a roomate:
Someone Please Be Roommates with This Kick Ass Guy from Craigslist

NuGuy

So no net growth at the mainline...BEST case...

and still no data on how many mainline jets were being replaced by more capable 70-76 jets....

To put it to you slowly, Slow, if you drop a bunch of 50 seaters, which have no direct impact on mainline flying, and replace them with fewer larger RJs, which do, you still get a drop in daily departures.

If you drop 200 50 seaters, and replace them with 100 70-76 seaters, you ALSO get a drop in ASMs. You also lose a bunch of mainline flying.

Slow, are you seriously comparing the Federal Government, in debt to the tune on tens of TRILLIONS of dollars, or Corporate Board structure, where we just went through a period where everyone was saying "Where the frack were the Board of Directors on when all these companies went to Tango Uniform while paying millions upon millions to their CEOs and executive staffs?

And you are using those two examples as an argument is that we need LESS oversight and transparency?

Check.

Perhaps the MEC should vote on ALL committee chairman positions. Maybe there should be a minimum amount of time between when a person announces he'd like the job and when the vote takes place, so there is ample time for vetting.

Nu

slowplay

So I'll let you and Bar get together on whether or not 50 seat RJ's affect mainline flying, but I see that you still haven't wrapped your head around the numbers...mainline had slight net growth and DCI had signficant net shrinkage (meaning something was replaced). Type as slow as you want...those are from the OAG and 10-k.

As to the second point, I provided two quick examples. You came up with a different plan. I asked you to provide examples of where your plan worked. You didn't. I asked again. Throw out my examples, because you want to change things to do it your way. I asked you to show me how your way is better, as there has to be someplace in governance that you can use as an example...

FlyZ

Sink,

I had the same thoughts. It seems to me they are trying to paint a rosy picture but there is little positive news. He paints it as an urgent need for pilots on the Douglas jets, and we think, "Oh, good, they need pilots.". But when he says "remove the surpluses," he is obviously talking displacements from high paying jets to lower paying jets. Look at that list - nearly all the widebodies have surpluses. So it looks to me like more of the same - backwards movement for everyone through this summer. Not to be a Debbie Downer on Monday morning!

TANSTAAFL

He also skirted the question of where the MSP and MEM DC-9 flying was going - away or to DTW reference, JG comments in base meeting that they (remaining 29 DC9-50's) will stay to end of 2013?

Columbia

PS hit today, however I didn't see a DC contribution. I thought it was supposed to be included.

DAL 88 Driver

You do get a DC contribution on your profit sharing. However, the contribution will show on your mid month regular paycheck pay stub, not on the profit sharing check pay stub.

Jesse

Now that's how I like to start my week (first 27 seconds).

Carl Spackler

Who flies the majority of Delta's domestic brand - Delta or DCI + Code Share?

Another great example of how our DALPA MEC bureaucrats operate and communicate. It's almost as if every day is all about: "How can we fool them today? How can we better obfuscate in our member communications?"

Slowplay's latest attempt at defending the indefensible is to ask for examples of other organizations that govern themselves differently than does DALPA. The answer of course is that most all corporations govern themselves far differently (and with greater transparency) than DALPA. Slowplay knows this too, so that left him with the need to portray the MEC committee structure and members as "middle managers" or "civil servants". Our MEC committees are the total power and influence within our union. They are equivalent to a corporation's executive leadership team. Nobody gets appointed to an executive leadership position without board approval. Very few board members get to be board members without being elected by the shareholders.

When comparing our union to a corporation, the LEC members are similar to a board of directors because they are elected by the members. Where our union differs is that our elected representatives (board members) DO NOT get to appoint the executive leadership team. They only get to appoint the individual chairmen. This is just one of the problems that has led to DALPA becoming a totally top-down organization that has utterly marginalized the LEC reps. This is what slowplay desperately hopes to hide from you.

Carl