Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Any news from Washington from ASA/alpa?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
John Pennekamp said:
That's the best you can do, Mike. Still mad that I called you out?

If you want to believe I'm will, that's fine. If I was him, then I suppose I wouldn't have to come here to ask these questions, as I'd already know the answers. Good thing I know how to contact him... he's actually very accessible and holds some very "interesting" opinions on many issues ASA and otherwise. Regardless, none of that really changes the issue at hand, and your cheap shots fall far far short. More testiment to the sagging credibility of this MEC in office when that's the best its biggest supporters can offer.

I read and comprehended your post. I see that there is no COLA and no scope. The MEC had an opportunity to change that and refused. There could have been a TA, but now there will be nothing for quite a while.

I noticed you didn't mention retro in your response. I'll assume you agree with me on that point.
Click to expand...

Are you still speaking in the 3rd person? Did your alter ego tell you that he only got 9 votes? He must have been in touch with the pilot group! Do you answer your own questions when you ask them? Do you like to hear yourself talk? Did you have imaginary friends when you were in your formulative years? Were you, or are you a Thumb Sucker? Did you have a special blankee? Have you heard of the Napolean Complex?
 
Last edited:
Speedtape said:
Are you still speaking in the 3rd person? Did your alter ego tell you that he only got 9 votes? He must have been in touch with the pilot group! Do you answer your own questions when you ask them? Do you like to hear yourself talk? Did you have imaginary friends when you were in your formulative years? Were you, or are you a Thumb Sucker? Did you have a special blankee? Have you heard of the Napolean Complex?
Click to expand...

Oh I'm so hurt. I might go cry... sniff, sniff.

How about this. Why don't you man up and sign your name to your personal attacks? Will you? It's real easy to be a tough guy sitting behind a computer isn't it?

W. Faruzzi
 
ASARJMan said:
The company's offer on retro is inadequate. And you do know what they say about "ass u me" don't you? :)
Click to expand...

On that we'll have to agree to disagree. I insist that if we hold out for full retro, we'll still be doing this two years from now. Aint going to happen.
 
John Pennekamp said:
On that we'll have to agree to disagree. I insist that if we hold out for full retro, we'll still be doing this two years from now. Aint going to happen.
Click to expand...

What the company offered is inadequate. Maybe we won't get full retro, maybe we will, or maybe we'll meet in the middle. We'll see, but it has to play out, and right now the company ain't playing. Hopefully the NMB will release us or give us a proffer in a week or two which will put more pressure on Delta, oops, I mean ASA to get this done.
 
John Pennekamp said:
On that we'll have to agree to disagree. I insist that if we hold out for full retro, we'll still be doing this two years from now. Aint going to happen.
Click to expand...

I would agree with that one. It can't be justified with what was going on after 9/11 and a couple of years, thereafter, in the economy and the industry.
 
I just switched channels and I think I'm seeing same thing on this one.

The Jerry Springer Show!
 
The interesting part of holding out for what they feel is fair. The economics are represented through negotiating, it may come back for a vote, and the economics of what individuals feel is fair may not be included. The pilots who are holding out for what they feel is fair can vote it down, most though I think are ready to move on with the contract to move on with life.

What is fair and what are presented are different. The economics of the industry are such that, there are so many pilots and companies working for less it hurts bargaining for fair. Good luck. I do not think fair will ever be on the table at ASA, sorry fellas
 
This has to be done to show the company that it is NOT OKAY to drag this out for this long....and continue screwing with our livelihood. If they want to keep waiting....that check is going to be just that much bigger!:D
 
FDJ2 said:
What does the PID have to do with scope?
Click to expand...

It was an attempt to put the scope "genie" back in the bottle. The portfolio whipsaw outsourcing isn't benefitng anyone.... your side or my side. The PID was attempt to stop this. Your side was too myopic as usual.... now we have about 9 DCI carriers competing with mainline for flying.

Interesting sidenote, the NWA MEC is considering a PID with Mesaba.... I guess the slogan "better late than never" applies..... sometimes people just have to be hit upside the head before they can see straight....
 
The PID was an attempt to restore DAL scope by fighting alter ego competitive flying. Do I need to go over the benefits of the PID, yet again?
  • All Delta flying by Delta pilots
  • No Delta furloughs
  • Delta could have purchased the "right sized" aircraft instead of 50 seaters
  • Delta pilots would have all the votes
  • and by ALPA standards (paycheck, or equipment type) ASA and Comair would have been zipped together DOH and stapled on the bottom of the DAL list
  • ALPA unity
The benefits for the ASA/Comair guys:
  • Career progression
  • Security
  • No loss of longevity
  • ALPA unity
Many are now coming over to Delta now anyway with the same approximate seniority as they might have held if the PID had been successful.
 
JoeMerchant said:
It was an attempt to put the scope "genie" back in the bottle. ....
Click to expand...

The PID was an attempt to force a seniority list integration, it didn't in any way address scope. There were other carriers at DCI besides ASA/CMR that would not have been a part of this combined list. What about them?

It's interesting that you now admit that it is a legitimate goal to limit the amount of outsourcing of an airlines code and setting limitations on it by charactering the PID as an attempt to put the scope "genie" back in the bottle. It's nice to see that you have come around and now admit that pilots can control the outsourcing of their code.
 
FDJ2 said:
The PID was an attempt to force a seniority list integration, it didn't in any way address scope. There were other carriers at DCI besides ASA/CMR that would not have been a part of this combined list. What about them?

It's interesting that you now admit that it is a legitimate goal to limit the amount of outsourcing of an airlines code and setting limitations on it by charactering the PID as an attempt to put the scope "genie" back in the bottle. It's nice to see that you have come around and now admit that pilots can control the outsourcing of their code.
Click to expand...

Nice spin FDJs. RJDC supporters have always said that scope was important. Without it, the rest of the contract is meaningless. However, one ALPA group should not be allowed to use scope to harm another group. Had the mainline groups not sold scope originally, this problem wouldn't exist. However now it must be dealt with, and it must be dealt with in a manner that is acceptable to all pilot groups within ALPA.

A single list is very much a scope issue, in fact it is the ultimate scope. One list, no outsourcing. The problem is, you want to turn back the clock at my expense. That is your right, and it is my right to sue my bargaining agent if it harms me. The better solution would be for us to work on a solution together, instead of you dictating a solution to me.... that won't happen!
 
JoeMerchant said:
A single list is very much a scope issue, in fact it is the ultimate scope. One list, no outsourcing.

You didn't propose one list with the PID, there were still other ALPA carriers not on your one list. You just tried to get on the DAL list plain and simple. Where were the ACA pilots, or other DCI pilots? Answer, they were not included. If you truly felt One List would solve the scope issue, why did the RJDC drop the one list demand from its litigation?

The better solution would be for us to work on a solution together, instead of you dictating a solution to me.... that won't happen!
Click to expand...

No one dictated a solution, it was the my way or the highway approach of the ASA/CMR MEC's at the time that doomed any meaningful solution.

Regardless, it's good to know that you do think it is o.k. to put the genie back in the bottle and that DAL pilots are within their rights to control the outsourcing of DL code, all the way up to shutting down all outsourcing.

We're making progress, you agree that we DAL pilots have the right to put the genie back in the bottle and limit outsourcing of our code and I agree you have a right to file a frivolous law suit.
 
Hey girls, how about taking your tired redundant scope discussion to a new thread?
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom