Compass one step closer

[DoinTime]

Actually, I think it proves YOU don't. The "number of signatures" relates to who is involved, and who must approve. I kinda thought you'd be sharp enough to figure it out. Bad assumption on my part. I promise not to overestimate your understanding of the issues again![/COLOR]

Keep dancing Occam....Keep dancing. You don't impress anyone.

 

[N2264J]

B. ALTER EGO POLICY
SOURCE ‑ Board 1980

1. When the management or stockholders of one airline company form another company for the purpose of creating a separate airline entity, it shall be called an Alter Ego company for the purposes of this section.


Oh great! A lecture from someone who thinks Mesaba airlines was started after 1980! [Hint: It ws founded in 1944]

Was Continental "formed" by Eastern?

 

[TurboAWD]

Occam, Airlink pilots don't "owe" you anything other than respect as fellow professional pilots.

What mainline pilots have failed to realize is that what is good in the long term for an airlink pilot is good in the long term for a mainline pilot. For example, if regional pilots had more leverage (via brand scope, single list, whatever), they could get better contracts. If CRJ200 pilots were making say $110/hr + good work rules at 9e/XJ, do you really think you would have had to bend over so far on your EMB190 (which, I'll say it again, UNDERCUT regionals) or DC9 rates?

Really, if anyone should be pissed, it's pilots in their 20's and 30's and 40's that had their careers sold out from under them by mainline pilots over the last several years by selling away scope. Of course, that has come back to bite the mainline pilots....more yet to come since you all gave up the 76 seaters. Granted, the gov't hasn't been much help for the last couple of decades.

Turbo

 

[DoinTime]

What mainline pilots have failed to realize is that what is good in the long term for an airlink pilot is good in the long term for a mainline pilot. For example, if regional pilots had more leverage (via brand scope, single list, whatever), they could get better contracts. If CRJ200 pilots were making say $110/hr + good work rules at 9e/XJ, do you really think you would have had to bend over so far on your EMB190 (which, I'll say it again, UNDERCUT regionals) or DC9 rates?

Finally someone gets it. To bad it wasn't a mainline guy.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Occam, Airlink pilots don't "owe" you anything other than respect as fellow professional pilots.

What is "owed" is the obligation of those asking for action to fully understand the possible consequences of the action.

What mainline pilots have failed to realize is that what is good in the long term for an airlink pilot is good in the long term for a mainline pilot. For example, if regional pilots had more leverage (via brand scope, single list, whatever), they could get better contracts. If CRJ200 pilots were making say $110/hr + good work rules at 9e/XJ, do you really think you would have had to bend over so far on your EMB190 (which, I'll say it again, UNDERCUT regionals) or DC9 rates?

I get it. I understand the potential to decrease the pressure being applied at the smaller-aircraft categories at the mainline. I've been here long enough to have witnessed the incremental increase in aircraft size at the Airlinks, and the subsequent erosion at the mainline.

That part is clear, and has never been in dispute.

The fact that it's not in dispute should lead you to an obvious question: If it has the potential to benefit mainline pilots, why haven't they been falling all over themselves to make it happen?

If you can't answer that question, both in terms of near-term cost, and long-term risk, you "owe" it to yourself to figure it out.

Really, if anyone should be pissed, it's pilots in their 20's and 30's and 40's that had their careers sold out from under them by mainline pilots over the last several years by selling away scope. Of course, that has come back to bite the mainline pilots....more yet to come since you all gave up the 76 seaters.

Spare me. Exactly how the heck do you think those Scope protections got there in the first place? We grab as much as we can when the trend is going our way and we have leverage...and try to hang onto the most important stuff when the trend is going the other way.

And thank you for reminding me of your culpability in the effort to erode the mainline franchise through your willingness to fly those 76-seaters for crap rates. You aspire to my job, yet attack it? Hey! You're just looking out for yourself...right? And only YOU are allowed to do that...right? When I do the same thing, why that's just not fair!...right?

 

[TurboAWD]

The fact that it's not in dispute should lead you to an obvious question: If it has the potential to benefit mainline pilots, why haven't they been falling all over themselves to make it happen?

If you can't answer that question, both in terms of near-term cost, and long-term risk, you "owe" it to yourself to figure it out.

Oh, I know the awnser...NWA pilots (like all pre 9/11 mainline pilots) were in a all-out self preservation mode because of two factors. They were dependent on defined-benefit pensions, and the seniority system makes it very unattractive to start over at another Carrier.

Couple of things to consider here. NWA was not going to liquidate if you voted no (see the price of the unsecured debt, plus Steland wouldn't get nearly as rich that way). Second, with all the labor costs so reduced, NWA was not looking for scope relief to lower the operating costs of 76 seat airplanes, so much as they were looking to get a bigger stick to leverage you in the future. You didn't win. You lost.

Spare me. Exactly how the heck do you think those Scope protections got there in the first place? We grab as much as we can when the trend is going our way and we have leverage...and try to hang onto the most important stuff when the trend is going the other way.

You don't get it. Scope IS the "most important stuff"

And thank you for reminding me of your culpability in the effort to erode the mainline franchise through your willingness to fly those 76-seaters for crap rates. You aspire to my job, yet attack it? Hey! You're just looking out for yourself...right? And only YOU are allowed to do that...right? When I do the same thing, why that's just not fair!...right?

Huh? What are you talking about? How do you know what rate I am willing to fly a 76 seater for? We don't have a 76 seat rate, and I haven't had the opportunity yet to vote for ANY rate at this company. PS, the rate I would vote YES to would have to be higher than what NW mainline pilots vote YES to fly the EMB190. A much larger aircraft. People in glass houses...

As far as aspiring to your job... Not anymore. I can't afford it thanks to what your group voted yes to. If NWA gets EMB190's, and I got stuck as a FO on that airplane for more than a year or two, I couldn't pay the bills.

Turbo

 

[Blade Runner]

And thank you for reminding me of your culpability in the effort to erode the mainline franchise through your willingness to fly those 76-seaters for crap rates. You aspire to my job, yet attack it? Hey! You're just looking out for yourself...right? And only YOU are allowed to do that...right? When I do the same thing, why that's just not fair!...right?[/quote]

Exactly How much power do you think we have at the Regional level to say no or even yes for that matter? The Avros came on line not due to our willingness to fly the dang things but because Mainline pilots allowed it to happen. Do you think we had any say when they took those airplanes from us? As far as culpability in eroding the mainline franchise you need look no further than your most recent collective bargaining agreement. There is a ripple effect with each and every decision made either by NWA management and NWA ALPA. These effects are felt by everyone Mainline and Airlink alike.This finger pointing is conterproductive and will serve only to further divide us. We have both endured extrodinary events, both have done what each felt is reasonable and in the best interest of both Pilot groups. But finger pointing and accusing each other about eroding the franchise will only pick at the already tender wound that management inflicted upon all of us.

Peace

 

[N2264J]

I wish all you RJDC guys would just go away...

Hey, I've got an idea. Why don't you try to gum us to death with ALPA's Merger and Alter Ego policy (whatever that is). Maybe I'll get aroused.

Admit it. The mainliners running this "union" have turned it into a dysfunctional, ineffective disaster. When Dan Brannan was running for president of the association last year, he said "management isn't afraid of ALPA anymore" and he's right. In the case of Compass, Mid Atlantic, Comair, ASA, Freedom, GoJet, Mesaba et al, ALPA is actually in management's pocket.

As the Alec Guinness character in the movie "Bridge on the River Kwai" realizes in the end, you've built a bridge for the enemy.

One MEC for one pilot group doing all the flying within the brand. That's where the leverage is. True "collective" bargaining. Labor still has that right under federal law. So why did our union abandon this fundamental principle of organized labor? Ask the mainliners - they got something for it.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Oh, I know the awnser...NWA pilots (like all pre 9/11 mainline pilots) were in a all-out self preservation mode because of two factors. They were dependent on defined-benefit pensions, and the seniority system makes it very unattractive to start over at another Carrier.

I agree... but you're still not explaining to me what possible downside there could be to mainline pilots for achieving Brand Scope or list integration with their Airlinks. I'm waiting to see if you understand the perspective of the mainline pilots....a perspective that pre-dated 9/11! Remember, the issue of Brand Scope was on the table well before 2001. Take a minute to work that out in your mind, and get back to me.

To repeat: If it's such a good deal and an obvious no-brainer, what possible reason(s) could mainline pilots have for not fighting aggressively for it?

It won't happen until everybody understands that!

Don't ask me to put myself in your shoes until you can demonstrate you're capable of doing the same for me.

Couple of things to consider here. NWA was not going to liquidate if you voted no (see the price of the unsecured debt, plus Steland wouldn't get nearly as rich that way).

That's not the issue. The only question was whether the T.A. was better or worse than the alternative...an imposed deal. I think our F/A's have provided the answer to that question.

Second, with all the labor costs so reduced, NWA was not looking for scope relief to lower the operating costs of 76 seat airplanes, so much as they were looking to get a bigger stick to leverage you in the future.

I don't think you're as familiar with our Scope as I am...or what exactly was given up in the new contract. I appreciate your willingness to try to understand what our management was "looking for" in our deal, but your conclusion is just flat wrong.

You don't get it. Scope IS the "most important stuff"

Do tell. "Scope" is like "Aloha"...it has many meanings. If you're referring to successorship, wet lease, and fragmentation, I won't argue with you. If you're referring to Brand Scope, it's apparent that it is not as important as other items in the contract.

But your assertion reinforces my belief that you don't fully understand the issue. Tell me WHY it isn't as important. You understand the benefit to you ("you" being any Airlink pilot), and you understand the potential benefit to mainline pilots...but your understanding of Scope will not be complete (or relevant!) until you can show me you understand the cost and the liability.

How do you know what rate I am willing to fly a 76 seater for? We don't have a 76 seat rate, and I haven't had the opportunity yet to vote for ANY rate at this company.

My bad! I used an industry model. Let's agree that the trend appears to downward across the industry...'kay?

PS, the rate I would vote YES to would have to be higher than what NW mainline pilots vote YES to fly the EMB190. A much larger aircraft. People in glass houses...

Good for you! I appreciate your willingness to draw-the-line and stop the downward trend. Since you haven't actually done that yet, can we agree that your unyielding committment is still theoretical at this point?

(Please don't take that as a slam. Until your entire pilot group votes on any proposal, neither of us has any way of knowing what would happen)

As far as aspiring to your job... Not anymore. I can't afford it thanks to what your group voted yes to. If NWA gets EMB190's, and I got stuck as a FO on that airplane for more than a year or two, I couldn't pay the bills.

Alright! Now we're getting somewhere! You're showing me a glimmer of comprehension on the "risk" element! Follow that line of logic and see where it leads.

Thanks for engaging on this topic. I appreciate it.

Semper Fi!

 

[Occam's Razor]

Exactly How much power do you think we have at the Regional level to say no or even yes for that matter?

Exactly the same power we have! The power to say "no" and walk away from your job. I did it in '98...under different circumstances (a profitable airline outside Chapter 11), but it still came down to walking away when the offer was unacceptable. You have had the same choice! Vote "no" and walk away...or vote "yes" and ride it out.

The Avros came on line not due to our willingness to fly the dang things but because Mainline pilots allowed it to happen.

Concur. The placement of the of the aircraft was beyond your control. The payrates for flying them was 100% in your control. The issue I raised with TurboAWD was the pay rates. That has, and will continue to be, YOUR choice.

Do you think we had any say when they took those airplanes from us?

Nope. Just as I have no say in the parking of the DC-9's, the parking of the DC-10's, B747's...or the purchase of B787's. I only control the rates. Same for you.

As far as culpability in eroding the mainline franchise you need look no further than your most recent collective bargaining agreement.

True. I'm not arguing that point. I am an eye-witness to the erosion of my pay and benefits. The issue is what further erosion would take place with the adoption of Brand Scope and/or list integration. Can you tell me what that could be?

There is a ripple effect with each and every decision made either by NWA management and NWA ALPA. These effects are felt by everyone Mainline and Airlink alike.This finger pointing is conterproductive and will serve only to further divide us. We have both endured extrodinary events, both have done what each felt is reasonable and in the best interest of both Pilot groups. But finger pointing and accusing each other about eroding the franchise will only pick at the already tender wound that management inflicted upon all of us.

AGREE!

Let me repeat: I am an advocate of Brand Scope. I think there is a way to make it happen, but it's gonna take those of us in the "center" of the issue to rein in (or muzzle) the mainline protectionists and the Airlink whiners. It will only happen with everybody understanding the risks and accepting a compromise.


P.S. I like your Blade Runner quote! As Batty says, "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe"