tsquare

Absolutely! And it needs to improve to the 415(c) limits.. Period.

tsquare

You are correct sir

gloopy

Every ALPA regional also has scope. They will not allow other regionals to do their flying. Is that "unfair"? And when mainlines gut scope, ALPA regionals don't benefit one bit in the first place. For every ALPA regional today that wins an RFP (and ONLY wins it by being among the cheapest BTW) there is almost always an ALPA regional that loses flying. And quite often non-ALPA regionals that win either new or previously ALPA regional flying. More outsourced mainline flying will equal more of the same. A never ending death spiral race to the bottom that serves no one in ALPA other than a few pilots at a handful or ALPA regionals and even then only for a short period of time.

Ditto for bigger RJ's. Today's outsourced 100 seater might pay an ALPA regional pilot group 10% more pay. Yay! But not only will mainline jobs paying far more to ALPA members be gutted, the very same ALPA regional who got the raise in the first place will simply be fored to give it up during the next round in order to bid on what they are already doing.

There will always be another group willing to "deal an ace" to their management to get future or even current flying. Some will do it even for the small and fleetingly transient temporary gain because they are lifers. Others will do it because they are not lifers and want the PIC time. Etc.

ALPA needs to help each carrier negotiate the best agreement it can, and mainlines have a leadership role to play if we are ever to see a brand scope/flow through type system on a broad scale, but ALPA regionals will have to accept that a staple is the ONLY way that will ever happen. If they say no to that, they can always go IndyAir. Go for it. But they do not have claim on mainline flying present, future or past. They can only control the terms of service for their brand and if that is just codeshare, then they have no claim to that. Even the NMB agrees. They won't let any regional even ask to sit at the table with mainline management. That's just how it works.

So throwing a cookie at the ALPA regionals makes the entire profession, including the ALPA regionals, weaker. ALPA should have no problem recognising this incredibly obvious reality and should have no problem saying they will not actively try and make it worse and in fact will actively try and help reverse it.

gloopy

Call their bluff then. If they do that for the USA, they lose their one and only eternal babysitter and they would have to provide for their own defense. Why do that when the world's reserve force (us) will do that for them forever and ever?

If we call their bluff and they don't blink, then we stop babysitting that corner of the world with our multi-trillion dollar mega-Marshall plan borrowed from fickle allies and borderline enemies alike. Our current trajectory is unsustainable enough as it is without giving away the store to Emirates for their little delusional rich kids playing with airplanes in the sandbox fantasy. That whole region is full of Branson wanna be's. The last thing we need to do is let them play in our backyard too because they play dirty with the money we pay them in the first place.

DAL 88 Driver

Well, first I'm going to assume that you meant to say, "Trust me, I agree that we shouldn't be bailing anyone out."

Now... if we had agreed to snap backs on the wage concessions (like you suggest), then we would have been getting HUGE pay increases right about now if not sooner. You seem to think that's okay, and you also say that we shouldn't be bailing the company out. So why is it not okay for us to get HUGE pay increases now until the company shows "six consecutive quarters" of profit with a 7-8% minimum margin? Do you see the inconsistency? I'm not trying to bust your chops, ACL, but you really are starting to sound like a company negotiator.

freightguy

On the spot gloopy! We should not spend any negotiating capital away on this deal. Tired of the rhetoric: what are you willing to give up...nothing!!

FrankCobretti

Emirates is Dubai.

Gulf Air is Bahrain and Qatar Airways is, well, Qatar.

USN has a big Bahrain presence, and USAF has a big Qatar presence. Who has the big Dubai presence that the US Government needs to protect by boning American pilots?

gloopy

Its also important to note that the concession store will be open by default for at least 2 more years anyway. They company can use that time/money to pay down debt and re-fi, as well as look at credit options for future needs on better terms. As strong as we are today, we will as a company be stronger in 2 years. Add in another year to negotiate a contract and the company will have no excuse. If they start the book-keeper trickery today (which so far it appears they have refrained from) and we are a much better company on paper in 2 years but for the sake of arguement we still aren't where we need to be, then they should have no problem offering us an immediate bridge contract. Like a 2 year contract with an immediate 10% raise across the board followed by another 7-10% raise, a percent or two every year in the DC, and at least get in writing that the next several large RJ contracts will be significantly drawn down and/or not be renewed and either way the number of permitted 70-76 seaters will be reduced accordingly and substantially, yet at a manageable pace over years. Then say we will get a minimum COLA per year after that even during section 6 to remove a lot of the incentive to stall and trash labor relations as a result. Throw in a few bones for per diem COLA and a few positive work rule changes and the company will have 4-5 years from now with very "manageable" cost creep and an ever improving bottom line.

Saying that we aren't going to get a billion per year of "restoration" isn't exactly going out on a limb. In fact, I would worry about anyone on the pilot side of negotiations who even makes that claim because history shows us that when tough talk like that is talked, scope concessions are always right behind the corner because they find that as awesome as it sounds, they can't bring home that much bacon yet want to save face by bringing home as much as they can to live up to their promises, so they sell today's flying for tomorrow's raise. But tomorrow never comes because of downturns/wars/epidemics/etc and the raise goes away and the scope sold to fund it doesn't come back.

sailingfun

A billion per year might be doable. That amount however will not be anywhere near a restoration contract. It will take well over 2 billion a year for that. To get a billion a year will take a strong united pilot group. I am not seeing that with the DPA thing.

DAL 88 Driver

10%!!! Are you kidding me?? Sounds like someone's expectations have already been effectively managed.

Sorry, but it's time to pay the piper. We took draconian cuts to our pay as an emergency measure to supposedly save the company from BK and then liquidation. It wasn't supposed to be a permanent reset of what this profession pays. And we did all that with no contractual provision to recover any or all of that pay when the crisis was over. Bad business on our part to negotiate and accept a contract like that! But equally bad business on the part of the company to not recognize that this deal of the century (for them) would not last forever. They should have been planning for at least partial restoration of our compensation all along. If they haven't done this, well tough toenails! I only feel bad for them just a tiny little bit because our MEC over the past few years has led them to believe they didn't need to prepare for it. But that's not my problem. And that is the way I expect my representation to be handled. If ALPA's not willing to admit this and is therefore not up to the task, then I will not hesitate for a second to vote for DPA to get some folks in place who at least understand the situation correctly. Sorry, but it's just business... and I have a family to provide for.