Exphojump,
In general, I agree in principle with most of what you say. For the sake of discussion, let's explore some of the points further.
exphojump said:
It is my understanding that provided ACAI doesn't violate the contract, DAL must assume the leases on the FRJs if they choose to end the current contract. DAL must give at least 180 days notice.
That seems consistent with what I've "heard". Since neither one of us has "seen" the actual contract between Delta and ACA, the assumption seems logical. However, we must be leary of assumptions.
The FRJs do not comprise more than 40% of the fleet, so crews are not required to be transfered. Since DAL would be assuming the leases it might not even be considered a sale of aircraft.
Believing you are correct on the "40% factor", that means that Section 1.D.2. of the ACA PWA would not be triggered. Depending on what the desires of the ACA pilots might be, that could be a "good thing" or a not so good thing.
With respect to assumption of the leases not being a "sale", I disagree somewhat. In my opinion, transfer of leases equates to transfer of ownership/control and is technically the same as a sale. (Most aircraft today are not "owned" by the carriers, they are leased). I doubt it would be in the best interests of ACA pilots to argue that a lease transfer is not a sale. That could neuter most of your Section 1. I advise caution.
I believe if DAL decides to terminate the contract with ACAI that it would be in the interest of both parties to do it gradually over a year or so.
Unless the D-jet fleet and all of the pilots come as a "package", I don't see a practical way to make this "rumor" happen overnight. Therefore I agree that such a transfer is likely to be phased in over a period of time. We're on the same frequency here.
DAL is currently fishing for concessions. A violation of DALPA scope because of ACAI's independent bid could present a barrier to this process. Providing cash flow for a RJ LCC competitor is also counter productive.
Good thinking. We agree. [Presuming, of course, that it would in fact be a "violation" of DMEC Scope. That is questionable, but the subject of a different discussion].
DAL can dangle the FRJs in front of ASA in exchange for a lesser contract or in front of CMR for concessions. With the CRJ orders drying up 330+ jobs comprise a mighty big carrot. I also believe their are 19 more aircraft in Germany with Avcraft planning on resuming production. The FRJ is very efficient on <500nm routes.
I of course can't speak for ASA pilots or what they might see as a "carrot". I really can't speak for CMR pilots as a whole either, but as one of them, I just don't see this idea as a "carrot" that would make Comair pilots willing to concede anything at all. Personally, I wouldn't agree to that. So that's one NO vote.
Granted orders for new aircraft are slowing. That's a normal sequence of events (which a lot of "regional" pilots don't seem to realize). It is not logical to assume that your airline will continue to add large numbers of aircraft to the fleet indefinitely in "normal" times, let alone when the industry is under so much excess capacity stress. I think Comair pilots have known for a long time that double-digit expansion is not the "norm" in the airline industry and had to change sooner or later.
Having said that, let's look at what this hypothetical scenario really means. It is true that the addition of 33 airframes means expansion and growth
for the Company, but what does it mean for the pilots currently employed?
1. If the aircraft come
with their current pilots, the Company expands (a good thing), the total number of pilots increases (another good thing),
but current Comair pilots have a net gain of nothing. On the contrary, depending on how seniority is integrated, some Comair pilots would inevitably suffer a
net loss of seniority. That carrot wont feed the idea of concessions.
2. If the aircraft come
without their current pilots, again the Company expands (a good thing), again the total number of pilot jobs increases (another good thing). Yes, there is a net gain of about 330 positions, but only 1/2 of those (145) represent any potential gain/value for current Comair pilots, i.e., the new Captain positions. The remainder would all go to "new hires" -- people that do not work here today.
I don't see Comair pilots as being willing to consider contract concessions to gain 145 upgrades, and I'm certain they would not willingly concede anything for people that do not currently work here. Therefore, the size of this alleged "carrot" is minimal.
The "carrot" would "feed" less than 10% of the present pilot population.
Concessions would hurt 100% of the current population. That's a no brainer and it won't fly.
IMO, if you want me to concede something (especially in a PWA as hard won as ours), then you should be prepared to offer me something of equal or greater value over the long term. This ain't it.
Comair pilots have never been in the carrot business and I have seen nothing that would indicate that they have an interest in carrots. Talk to us about a cement factory (concrete) and maybe we'll listen, but "produce" (as in carrots) is a perishable commodity. No sale.
Promises are another commodity that doesn't sell well to Comair pilots. In my opinion, and no offense intended if you are an ACA pilot (I'm just being candid), the concessions agreed to by the ACA group in an effort to "save the UAL deal", would never have gotten off the ground at Comair.
Unlike ACA, we are a subsidiary of Delta. However, that doesn't change the equation by much. All of our "eggs" are in the Delta basket (like ACA's were in the UAL basket), and in reality we are worse off than you all for we do not have the option of making independent decisions as a corporation.
As a subsidiary, if Delta tanks tomorrow (like UAL did) there is nothing we can do and we will tank along with it. The corporate entity of Comair is nothing but a shell. We can't stop our own joint bankruptcy if the owners should go bankrupt.
We have absouletely no contractual job security, for Delta (the Company not the Delta pilots), which owns us lock, stock and barrel, is not bound by our contract and can do with us or to us whatever it chooses to do. There is nothing that we could "save" by making contractual concessions.
As it turns out, there was nothing that you could "save" either, as evidenced by your current situation. Essentially, you agreed to a bunch of concessions on a promise of nothing. Nothing is exactly what you got so far. (Thank goodness the concessions don't take effect without a "UAL deal"). Even if you did "get the deal", honestly, the logic of why ACA pilots (SKYW and ARW pilots too) embrace the concept that they should pay for it escapes me totally.
In the world of "What IF's" you really had nothing to gain from those concessions. Therefore, I see them as having been totally unnecessary.
I have no crystal ball and no real knowledge of what is going to happen, but I would not be surprised (in spite of your LCC announcement), if you still strike a deal with United and postpone the LCC.
While the Bain group may have embraced the myth of Mesa's low bid takeover of the regional world, the fact is that it will take United years (anybody's guess how many) to replace what it will lose if ACA really goes independent. That outweighs by miles any gains they might have made from the ACA pilot concessions.
In the balance of things, market forces will ultimately determine what happens, not pilot concessions from small airlines like Comair and ACA. The problems are in the "legacy carriers" and they are endemic. They can't be solved by pilot concessions at any regional carrier.
I admire the gutsy stand of ACA management. Yes, its risky, but so is an unprofitable contract with UAL. I only wish that the pilot groups at ACA, ARW and SKYW had the wisdom to stand their ground in the way that ACA management has. It is true that ACAI may become "unprofitable" if the LCC venture doesn't work, but it is equally true that ACAI would become unprofitable by agreeing to a lousy deal with UAL. Pilot concessions won't change either.
Just my opinions and probably all wrong. Thanks for your reply.
