ALPA's Scope Defense - Incompetence?

[Freight Dog]

Your $25000 lawyer

SDD,

I think you should just decertify ALPA on your property, and go with IBT or Ravers' Joke of a Disgruntled Coalition as an in-house union. You yourself said that IBT did more than ALPA for you while you were walking. Do you think the intent to bankrupt OUR union is gonna make you friends outside of your precious RJDC? Hardly..

Let alone your management and all others watching and laughing at you and your $25,000 lawyer.

Oh and a quick question...

Let's assume by some freak of nature you win this case... you said you're not about decertifying ALPA. I'm curious why would you want a bankrupt union on your property, or do you want to ruin ALPA altogether and then bail? I mean what's the story?

 

[surplus1]

Actually, it would be more akin to staying in the country, but ousting your government because you didn't like the laws, which ain't such a bad idea. You RJDC guys can't seem to get your analogies straight. You're always putting out the smoke and mirrors to make the alternatives seem less attractive, and making your course of action seem like a "mission from God."

Does that by any chance mean that you see the union/mainline point of view as the "true religion and mission from God" and the supporters of RJDC as the infidels?

Nothing personal, I'm just trying to get a handle on your view of the "politically correct".

 

[surplus1]

Part 1 of 2

Originally posted by Puff Driver

<<<<I take it you really have no idea how many airplanes it would take to go from "anywhere to everywhere" The capital outlay and the lack of any diversification whatsoever would both be tremendous. "All Delta flying done by Delta pilots," is THE premier naive statement of yours, John. Actually, as long as Delta flying included you on the list, you really would'nt be concerned about the rest, would you?!?

First, I did not write those words about Delta flying. You are quoting some other person. Hate to burst your bubble but not only is not my premier statement, it's not my statement at all. I happen to be on record as opposed to one list so your comments are misplaced. So are your thoughts by the way, but we'll deal with that later.

Second, why do you insist on calling me John? You appear to have me confused with someone else. John isn't my name and actually I don't even know any pilots with that given name. I don't mind your arguing with me (although I would much prefer to discuss things than argue) but please try not to confuse me with others. Does your reference to "John" have some special significance that I'm perhaps missing?

Third, take a look at some of the postings by FlyDeltasJets who is one of your peers. He and I and others have been debating these issues for some time. We agree on several points and disagree on others. The discussion is always civil. May I suggest you follow his example? It will lend far more credibility to your remarks.

<<<Actually, it is written in the C&BL. read the part about alter ago airlines, John.>>>

My reading of the C&BL does not reveal any reference to the term "alter ego". Am I lost or are you misplacing your reference? Do me the favor and point out the Article, Section and paragraph, please.

Note: If you should be unable to locate the reference in the C&BL yourself, I'll be happy to point out which document you should search. Then we will no longer be dealing with ALPA according to Puff.

<<<I am not complaining about the RJs taking my job. You must have me confused with somebody else.>>>>

Pardon me for causing confusion. The word "you", as used in my remarks is plural. It did not refer to you personally but to the Delta pilot group as a whole. I hope that helps your understanding. The English language is troublesome at times isn't it?

<<<The reason you "have" the flying to begin with was because of us. We cannot be scoped out of any aircraft, because we were the original entity. In short, there is no "your" flying. You live because the code, you die from it as well.>>>>

I respect your right to your opinion however, your apparent lack of knowledge with respect to law and contracts may have you in over your head so to speak.

When my airline was incorporated some twenty-five years ago it was not affiliated in any way with Delta Air Lines. Our flying was ours. Approximately seven years later, my airline entered into a contract with Delta, Inc. to provide certain services on a revenue sharing basis. At that time the contract between Delta, Inc. and Comair, Inc. made no reference to recognition of any contract or contracts that may have existed between ALPA (representing Delta's pilots) and Delta Air Lines. Our flying remained ours. Subsequently, Comair's contract with Delta, Inc. was renegotiated and renewed. That new contract also did not recognize or even acknowledge any third party contract between ALPA and Delta Air Lines. Our flying remained ours.

Early in 2000 Delta, Inc. acquired Comair Holdings, Inc. and its subsidiaries by a tender offer for 100% of Comair's outstanding stock. Comair subsequently became a wholly owned subsidiary of Delta, Inc. Comair's flying, thus became the property of Delta, Inc. It did not become the property of the Delta pilots.

Go back to the contract you had before the 1996 contract. What was the content of your Scope clause in that contract? What do you believe you "gave" us in that contract?

I know that your 1996 contract with Delta Air Lines provided and exemption to that portion of Delta's flying conducted in aircraft with less than 70-seats. I also know that you believe that you "gave" us something by doing that. In fact, you gave us nothing. My company never recognized your contract with Delta, Inc. My Company's contract with Delta, Inc., made no reference to your contract with Delta. Therefore, your Scope (whether it exempted 70-seats or exempted nothing at all) in fact was never legally binding upon Comair and did not affect us legally in any way. You therefore had nothing to "give" us for you owned nothing and did not control that portion of Delta's flying that we do. Had Comair chosen to exceed the limits of your contract with Delta, Delta, Inc., had no legal means of imposing the provisions of your scope on Comair's flying, without the consent of Comair. That consent was never given.

Had Comair chosen to engage in flying that you thought your contract with Delta prohibited, Delta's only means of adhering to your scope provisions would have been the cancellation of its contract with Comair. Do you really believe Delta would have attempted that on your behalf? While Delta did have the contractual right to terminate the code-share agreement, as did Comair, the fact that Comair was operating 100 jets, carrying 8 million passengers, and earning profits in excess of 20% per annum, made such termination based on your scope clause totally and legally impractical. It wasn't going to happen.

Since Delta now owns Comair completely, Delta may do as it pleases with the flying that it purchased. You however, as in "the Delta pilots" did not "give" Comair anything ever. As a matter of fact, at the time ALPA negotiated your 1996 Scope Section, your MEC had never even seen a copy of the contract between Comair and Delta, Inc.

I'm sorry Puff but you simply do not know what you are talking about. You are uniformed and have apparently believed a myth for a very long time. If it's any consolation, you're not alone. You don't have to take my word for any of that. Talk to your attorney and ask him if any two entities may enter into a contract that is legally binding upon a third entity without that third parties consent.

Today as a wholly owned subsidiary of Delta, things are different. Delta has agreed to give you a portion of its flying. It has also retained a portion of its flying that you never controlled, never owned and still don't. Today, if you can get Delta to agree, you could scope us out of our flying. If WE could get Delta to agree, we could do the same to you. The flying isn't yours buddy and it never has been, it is Delta's. You get from Delta what they choose to let you have. We get from Delta what they choose to let us have.

When you signed your current contract, Delta agreed to give you roughly 66 to 63% of its block hours and retained the rest. The events occurring since you signed the contract, have rendered that provision moot. The percentage you will be allowed to control, if any, must now be renegotiated and reset. Your contract does not oblige Delta to agree to any specific percentage. It merely specifies a percentage "appropriate to the circumstances". What that might mean is anybody's guess. Until it has been renegotiated and a new agreement is reached, you don't control any of the flying. It is ALL Deltas and they can give you what they choose and not give you what they choose. That is exactly what they are doing.

DCI, which now manages CMR and the other "connection carriers", has just added a new carrier and is also adding new aircraft to the subsidiaries' fleets. By the time you complete negotiations to reset the ratios, we will have about 45% of the domestic block hours in actual operation, if not more. If you think Delta will scrap that and give it all back to you after the fact, you'd better think again. If you want it back, you'll have to buy it back. How much do you think your senior pilots will give up for that? That's not a pretty picture and I'm sure you don't like it, but that's what you agreed to and that's how it is.

For your sake, I hope the lawyers that are defending ALPA against the RJDC will do a better job than they did of writing your Scope clause because what they gave you is a sieve. Note also, that none of the scope clauses they have written elsewhere are doing much better. BTW, I hear the defense attorneys happen to be the same attorneys that wrote your Scope.

While it may be true that we can't scope you out of your aircraft, the truth is we haven't tried and we aren't trying now. You are the predators that have been trying to scope us out of our aircraft. The facts appear to indicate that you aren't doing a very good job of it. Perhaps you should rethink your strategy.

If you would step down from your pedestal for a moment and work with us constructively, maybe we could develop together a new strategy that has a chance of success. Try it, you might like it.

Continued in Part 2

 

[surplus1]

Part 2 of 2

Originally posted by Puff Driver
<<<Actually, the line is drawn by the only people who have the contractual right to do so, the Delta MEC. If we redraw it, you will just have to live with the new line, just as you benefitted when the line was moved the other way. I noticed you didn't complain when we were "controllong" your careers back then, were you Johnny?!?>>>>>

If you want to believe that, be my guest. We have to live with the line where Delta chooses to put it. You may think that the Delta MEC is Delta, but that thought is just another one of your many delusions. Every time your contract becomes amendable, Delta can put your scope on the table and they will. When all the BS is over, you will wind up with whatever Delta chooses to give you. We are in the same boat. When it comes to this aspect of the situation we are not nearly as different as you would like to believe.

If you don't happen to like what Delta chooses to give you, you can withdraw your services and strike. Since your contract is not amendable until 2005, plus 2 years of negotiations, means we're looking at 2007 (maybe). Much may be different by that time.

The day you decide to strike, you will have to deal first with the Government to see if the President appoints a PEB. If he does, you will then have the option of accepting the PEB recommendations or not. If you don't, the President may allow you to strike or may have the Congress tell you what you will accept. If you are allowed to strike, you will then be dealing with the Company and a fleet of several hundred RJs, operated by six different airlines, all of which will continue to carry Delta's domestic traffic, while you walk the line. Just as it was in the Comair strike. Granted you will have much more leverage than we did, but you will not have the ability to completely stop the company from operating. If they can keep 30% of the domestic passengers moving, it won't be too long before you settle on their terms. The sad story is that the upper 2/3 of your list aren't going to risk their jobs at Delta just to keep a few more RJs from flying to please the lower 1/3 of your list.

It seems to me there are far better ways to deal with the problems before it gets to that nasty scenario. Perhaps the junior 1/3 of your list should rethink its position.

<<<WAG is your typing. Do you even read what you type??? I was actually referring to companies such as MIDWAY who meet the size requirement, but really lack the mission that Delta accomplishes. IMO, this is where the C&BL fall short by definition of our scope. Clear enough, or do you want to twist that statement around as well.>>>>>

Thanks, but I'll pass on trying to twist that. Candidly, the lack of coherence prevents me from even understanding whatever you're trying to say. There's nothing there to rebut.

<<<Your whole argument is based on the fact that our relationship has changed based on the fact that Delta has purchased you. It hasn't>>>

Not really. The relationship has definitely changed, however my argument is based on the realities I explained above at length. We obviously have a very different concept of reality.

<<<So? Do you think I care. This is just more of your martyr rhetoric and it falls on deaf ears. FACT: Your job exists because Delta pilots allowed it to. I noticed an abscence of crying back then. The Delta pilots giveth and the Delta pilots taketh away. EGO? NO. Just plain facts. The truth hurts sometimes, John, but it is nonetheless the truth.>>>>

I pretty much have the picture that you don't care. It's too bad (for you) that you fail to realize that your attitudes are actually hurting your own more than your intended victims. I also have come to realize that many of you don't know enough to care. Happily there are many more pilots at Delta who are much smarter than that and I think those do care. There are also nearly a thousand very junior Delta pilots on the streets and I'm sure they care too. I'm naïve enough to believe that many more care than don't. You just go ahead and believe what you want to believe. I'm far from being a martyr Puff, but you actually evoke pity.

As for the crying I don't think we're doing much of that. We would like to see a solution to the problems because it is in everyone's best interest, including yours, even though you seem unable to realize that.

Personally, I hope the solution does not include seeking one list for I do not see that as being in the best interest of my group. I know that our junior pilots won't agree with me on that part and I will support what they want because they represent the future. However, I think the time for one list has now passed and we should pursue different methods of resolution. My reason for that is because there is not enough creative thinking in ALPA today to develop a plan that the Company might accept at this stage of the game. They (the Company) are winning big time thanks to the stupidity of the union's decision and the intransigence of your group. Very few teams will forfeit a game that they are winning by a wide margin. Altruism is not one of management's virtues nor is it part of their job description.

I think there are other ways that we might use to restore the balance of power between management and the union, but that presupposes that we can first give the term "union" some significant meaning. If your rhetoric is representative of the Delta pilot group, there is no hope of that. Things will just have to run their course and we'll see how the chips fall.

I'll leave the rest of what you wrote without comment. Not enough substance to warrant the effort.

You take care buddy and fly safe. I wish you well, notwithstanding that I think you are so far out in left field that you're not even in the game.

 

[macdaddy]

Da mn straight management is winning!!! There is NO creative thinking at ALPA HQ.

The only thing Woerth seems concerned about right now is getting guns in the cockpit.

Another 9-11 type of attack seems remote to me. But,

The loss of good paying jobs is a reality - (I'm talking about the total amount of good paying jobs), thanks to the shift to regionals.

When is ALPA going to do something constructive?

 

[NYRANGERS]

Da mn straight management is winning!!! There is NO creative thinking at ALPA HQ.

The only thing Woerth seems concerned about right now is getting guns in the cockpit.

Another 9-11 type of attack seems remote to me. But,

The loss of good paying jobs is a reality - (I'm talking about the total amount of good paying jobs), thanks to the shift to regionals.

When is ALPA going to do something constructive?

Well said, I couldn't agree with you more!!!

 

[FL000]

Does that by any chance mean that you see the union/mainline point of view as the "true religion and mission from God" and the supporters of RJDC as the infidels?

no and yes, respectively

Nothing personal, I'm just trying to get a handle on your view of the "politically correct".

I don't take anything personally.

 

[Freight Dog]

Re: Part 1 of 2

The flying isn't yours buddy and it never has been, it is Delta's. You get from Delta what they choose to let you have. We get from Delta what they choose to let us have.

Surplus, I think you just proved my point that your lawsuit against ALPA is frivolous. You should be suing Delta management if anybody, and I think your $25,000 lawyer screwed you out of money.


Aloha!

 

[surplus1]

Re: Re: Part 1 of 2

Surplus, I think you just proved my point that your lawsuit against ALPA is frivolous. You should be suing Delta management if anybody, and I think your $25,000 lawyer screwed you out of money.


Aloha!

I've read your remarks in other posts and chose not to reply previously. What you said above is the reason. I'm answering now because you spoke to me directly.

While I'm sure you are well intended, I candidly believe (based on your posts) that you are insufficiently familiar with the core issues, the litigation itself or the ALPA to offer a valid opinion as to whom the defendant should be or that I need to rebut.

When the court makes it's ruling, we will know more about the appropriatness of the defendant. Until then, you and I will have to differ.

Please continue to participate in the discussion and present your opinions. I'm sure there are others who will both chose to agree or debate with you.

Fly safe and thanks for your message.

 

[Freight Dog]

Surplus,

As a member, I'm pretty familiar with ALPA. What I am not familiar with, or what I do not understand is your lawsuit. I've read it, so yeah, I guess I'm familiar with your allegations and maybe something is wrong with me because I still don't get it.. the ratio between Delta and Comair pilot groups is like 9-1. Even if your MEC was present at Delta's negotiations, what function would he serve?! What COULD he do?!

$100,000,000 in exemplary and punitive damages??!?

You still haven't answered my question. Why didn't you just decertify ALPA on your property? Or is this RJDC thing nothing but a few old loudmouth zealots trying to stir up trouble, bankrupt ALPA and then bail out? What's the story here?

Also, when is the hearing/trial/ruling on this?


Thanks, fly safe and ALOHA!