TeddyKGB

Nuff said

Carl Spackler

Nobody can make that definitive statement yet. The case law is unclear. There is a non-airline union case where a judge ordered that the union cannot strike over the scope of their work. But a similar such order with a different union was later overturned on appeal. There has not yet been a press to test of this issue in the airline industry.

We'd have no choice but to show up. Our CURRENT scope language allows for the RAH scope abuse through the sham of a "holding company". Some DCI could be made a "holding company" tomorrow and start ordering 777's. Our own union says the language they wrote is too weak to even attempt a grievance regarding holding companies.

Because our scope allows it. Just like big airplanes in holding companies.

I appreciate that you at least admit you have a role in this debacle. Most just prefer to blame everything on major pilots.

No they wouldn't. Because it's not about finances...it can't be. Delta is willingly operating stuff with higher CASM's rather than bringing it in house. They do it because it's all about the whipsaw. Mainline pilots getting flying back would prevent the whipsaw, therefore your thesis of it mattering if mainline pilots truly wanted CRJ's back is meaningless.

Wrong again. That may have been the case a decade ago, but it's not the case now.

Carl

acl65pilot

Oh boy, there goes this place.

LEC mtg was full. Great turnout.

nerd2009

Any highlights on the meeting? Inquiring minds want to know.

hoserpilot

They said that our worries about the NN regarding staffing are a bit premature. The staffing formula will not change. Remember that we've only seen part of what's been agreed to. What if we got a daily guarantee of 6 hours? What if we also add reserve pay to equal line holder pay? Those junior reserve folks would get that higher pay (alv + the additive) and not fly till they die each month. They spent the first 1 1/2 hours listening to our comments from the floor and answering each one. They put a lot of dumb rumors to rest and showed how that silly 11% rumor came about. Remember these guys will be back flying the line under this contract. We're all still trying to figure out what the big "opportunity" is that required the rush.

acl65pilot

Officer's Report

Presentation of DCI fleet compliance

C2012 discussion
-NNP Discussion.
-A lot of concern over the new reserve rules and ALV Changes
-A lot of talk about scope, and issues though out the section
-Discussion on parity of trip guarantee for reserves
-Discussions of how this contract cycle will not take the FT/DT changes in to account. This will be done at a later date (ATA is lobbying to make changes to better effect efficiencies and staffing)

Discussion on HND and an update there

More C2012 discussion with direction from the floor given to the reps.

*Overwhelming sentiment of the reps was, we may or may not get an agreement that they can vote for. If they do, it still may not be good enough for the pilots, and they are totally OK with going the traditional Section 6 route if needed. This involved only a few months of work and not the culmination of years.
*Pilots do your homework on how long you expect a section six process to cycle to take, your expectations at the end game, and then understand time value of money. Do the math. Read the contract, and understand the changes and or modifications if you get to vote on an agreement. There will not be a correct way to vote if it is an informed vote.

-Two great resolutions which will be on the C44 website after they get done posting them. I suspect today or tomorrow, and they effect all pilots going forward, so go read em at that time.


Overall the meeting was well attended. Needed to restock the food, and drinks three times, had to add chairs twice, and the meeting ran 30 minutes longer than planned.

The reps want to continue to hear from you. What your input and your reasoning for everything that you demand.

Finally, they said it about 50 times, THIS IS A POSITIVE contract. Vice Chair stated that Section 1 needs to stand on its own. Also stated that the 11% deal was a comparison, but no where near where he expected to be. We deserve more in hourly, and our other areas of our contract because suffice to say, this pilot group as brought over a billion of dollars of equity to the airline stock, as will as help poise this company for greatness by consummating the only successful merger as of late.

Pilots were well thought out and deliberate in the debate. No ranting.

acl65pilot

Hoser, very true. The formula will not change, but some of the results will. Mostly in less GS's and over the three year rolling average the reserves required number will drop significantly.

mtbguy

Other than looking at Travelnet, anyone know how to check loads on an Alaska flight to jumpseat/nonrev? THX!

hoserpilot

I liked the slide during the scope discussion regarding some of our JV/high end flying protection. It was a blank page! I believe they heard us loud and clear that scope and pay are our number one and number one concerns.
I didn't try the handshake but I did say the code word. Somehow a few of us knuckleheads all ended up sitting together.




See what I did there?

hoserpilot

Pm on its way....