Bucking Bar

Al, Pinnacle, Sailing Et. Al.,

ALPA, specifically the Delta MEC does not want a merger with regional airlines. Even the MidWest pilots learned this the hard way. When the issue comes up the usual suspects will roll out the same old tired scarecrows (regional qualifications and seniority demands) to stand in the way of unity.

Compass was as close as we are going to get and the powers that be in the Delta MEC ran over the expressed will of the Delta pilots like a "freight train."*

Term used by the C44 Chair when the Compass resolution passed.

sailingfun

Of course DALPA has no say in the matter. If the company chose tomorrow to merge the airlines then DALPA would have to start the seniority list integration process. Its a management decision to merge or not merge airlines. DALPA can do nothing more then suggest at best.

N9373M

No RJs leaving AGS on Monday ! All 757s (on DAL, or DEL if you're a reporter)

SailorJerry

There's already precedence set for where pilots from DCI carriers go. This is outlined by the flow through agreements that were at one time in force between Delta and Mesaba and Compass. Mainline shouldn't tolerate seniority hopscotch by RJ folks. That being said they should all be offered a no displacement fence on their current equipment with bidding rights to our equipment.

gloopy

I'd also vote no. There is no way in the world of economics the benefits of outsourcing another large RJ would in and of itself justify a 777. If we agreed to something like that, it would only be because the company was getting them anyway and bribed us with our own flying to give up more of our own scope.

And that's best case, assuming all the 777's were truly permanent "growth" airframes and not future 747 replacements, 787 delivery conversions or future ER replacements on a 2 for 3 basis that would not be in our favor.

I'm sure management and DALPA are huevos deep into the "now that we've established what you are, let's talk price" mentality. So to that I say for every new 76 seat RJ we allow to outsource, every pilot gets ten million dollars cash. That's our price. Don't want to pay it, well, what was it again that the little kitty said when the nipple ran dry?

gloopy

Staple or Gulf Tango Foxtrot Oscar.

They didn't say that when they bought ASA. They didn't say that when they bought Comair. They didn't say that when they sold ASA for nickels on the dollar. And they're not saying that now WRT Comair. I like a good straw man arguement for the sake of brevity and whatevers, but our seniority list is up to us and what we negotiate. Management can't just demand to put a regional on it, nor would they ever want too. When we do finally hire in the year 3015 or whenever (whoops, did I fat finger that one?) [<--that's what she said] the last thing management is going to want is max pay scale "new hires" when they could hire them off the street @ first year everything.

tsquare

I disagree with that. The example wouldn't even be close to a balance, nor improvement.

gloopy

I also agree with your, uh, disagreement. It would be an epic loss worthy of a blunders in aviation special on the History channel. But it *could* still technically be interpreted that way because "total number of DCI jets per mainline jets were reduced" therefore an improvement in the production balance...if you define improvement as number of planes or even block hours or even number of pilot jobs. Either way, that's an "improvement".

If that's not what we had in mind, how come our opener didn't say we aim to reduce large RJ's at DCI? Every other section had an "increase this" or "significantly increase that" bullet point except scope. Although our opener did mention 76 seaters...only as they apply to one of the penalties for furloughing. But nowhere did it say we want to reduce the number of outsourced large RJ's.

tsquare

me too![/QUOTE]

I am guessing that you also have the luxury to be a one issue no voter because you have time to make up for the losses that will probably be occurring if it is scope or nope. There are many that have been under a BK contract for what should have been their prime earning years in their career. I am about to enter mine. For the Carl's and others in his situation, and I am guessing here.. but I would bet that they are not willing to pay for a recapture of the 76 seat flying... just a guess.. and frankly, I don't blame them. You can look at that as "selling out the junior guys", but how about looking at it from their perspective? They would be recapturing flying that cannot increase unless the airline grows (and as I have said, that language IS weak.. and should be fixed) and it would be costing them even MORE money. Younger guys on the other hand would have that paid for scope issue, AND a longer time to recapture the pay that the old guys would be foregoing. Talk about altruistic! Balance guys... it is all about balance.

gloopy

DCI carriers can be unilaterally reduced to zero airframes flying in any capacity for Delta Air Lines. There is nothing they can do about it and there is no DFR anywhere. Not even close. While I would still be concerned with a seniority grab even if their pilots voted 99% for a staple, its a very small risk. One that we should avoid? Sure, let's avoid it. There are numerous other ways to do it including bringing planes to our certificate or starting yet another "NewCo" certificate. There is no need to use a DCI pilot list if the grabbing of even a single seniority number is a credible threat.