ASA pay scales

[MetroSheriff]

That's it...

I don't know anyone who would argue with the ends that you want to achieve, but many of us are uncomfortable with the means: a plaintiff's lawsuit against the people that we work with every day. Now we have turned into unwitting spokesmen every time we occupy a major jumpseat. Most of them don't understand that most of us don't agree with the methods of the RJDC.

FL000,

Perfectly stated.

 

[~~~^~~~]

OK Metro and FL000:

Ok, both of you are against litigation to force ALPA to uphold their obligations to the dues paying members at ASA. What alternative do you propose that has not already been tried?

The reason why I keep harping on this topic is because it is an important issue and many pilots have not figured out how all the parts fit together. Further, pilots like Toy Soldier should have a way of learning what is going on before committing to a job. (when I hired in I had no idea of the differences in upgrade potential at Eagle, for example)

It is likely that I have failed to properly communicate what is going on, or that you do not care to learn the facts. Either way it is a loss for us collectively when our pilot group does not understand the issues well enough to use the opportunities provided on the Delta jumpseat to explain the issues that divide our union and provide positive solutions that enhance the careers of all pilots by working together.

Understand that if the RJDC fails, there will still be litigation over ALPA's scope. (Refer to the previous post on why scope based on aircraft type is an illegal horizontal restraint on trade) This is an opportunity for us pilots to have input on the outcome.

Now let me address some of your questions:

Given the friction that exists between the groups, and the fact that many Delta pilots are on the street right now, what is to keep DALPA from pushing to fly the RJs at mainline, with THEIR pilots.

The friction between the pilot groups has nothing to do with it. DALPA is pushing to obtain RJ's at mainline - after all that is the way the current DALPA contract is written. ALPA has shown their support at US Air for just this type of solution. The US Air Express pilots have already formed their own group using Mike Haber to sue ALPA. (Now keep in mind the US Air Express pilots have done everything possible to obtain the favor of ALPA in the past and what has it got them - nothing)

I would like to scope all DCI flying for ASA/Comair, thereby keeping all Delta flying in the "Delta family".

A good idea - but there are problems. First, ALPA does not want ASA and Comair performing 40% or more of Delta system flying. Potentially we would have enough votes to be a threat at the Board of Directors. Further, without DALPA's support there is no way we could negotiate this.

But what happens to the codeshare fee for departure carriers? That would leave them out in the cold. Again I ask the question, why are they soliciting help from those they intend to carve out of the deal. That is what smells fishy to me, and no one will answer the question.

We share common interests with Skywest and ACA pilots who are under threat from scope on the United front. Recently the United MEC threatened to enforce contract provisions that would end their code share entirely. (pure speculation on my part is that if Delta scoped all Delta brand flying Skywest would organize with ALPA very quickly)

Bottom line is that each pilot group negotiates what it can without respect for the harm that it may cause other pilot groups. We can not depend on DALPA's good will to watch out for our careers and our own MEC has been unable to represent us to Delta as a result of ALPA's interference and lack of support.

People like Bill Burgey and Woerth did not get to their positions by being idiots. They, and their attorneys, see this professionally, not emotionally. However, the pilots hold the votes and this is an emotional issue for many. Again, that is the reason I spend the time trying to get the facts out. As you pointed out, everyone seems to agree on one list once they understand that it will not cost them seniority, rank, or privledge. It really is the best solution for everyone, including the Delta pilots.

The RJDC, and the lawsuit, provide the excuse and motivation for ALPA and DALPA to compromise in ways that they could not if there were not reason to negotiate with the Connection pilots. Some radical Delta pilots simply believe that Connection guys are inferior and will resist any type of onelist for that reason alone. The law suit provides a good reason for doing what is best for everyone.

As for the negotiations that the RJDC has with ALPA you and I will both have to wait and see what, if anything, happens. We both know that our MEC has not ever been given the opportunity to represent us on this issue. However, the Court has reccommended to ALPA that they engage in settlement discussions with the RJDC plaintiffs - that is not much, but it is more progress than we have made within our own union.

Regards,
~~~^~~~ Fins to the left!

 

[ifly4food]

Prof,
I have to agree with Metro, FL000, and even Fliin' Sig. At yours and SDD's urging, I looked at the RJDC site. As stated it's mostly courtroom banter and propaganda. The base goal is still the same. I don't want to be part of such an effort and 90% of us at ASA feel this way. You know this to be true.
I'm tired of having to explain my way into the jumpseat, I'm tired of geting dirty looks from Delta pilots in the halls. I'm tired of reading these broken record manifestos online. You guys need to drop this. While I agree with your ultimate goals, a lawsuit isn't the answer. We need to scope non wholly owned airlines out and then work with DALPA for one list with a staple. Without DALPA's help we're dead in the water.
As you can see, RJDC has only served to divide is. It's time to get together. Stop this madness.

 

[Caveman]

I'm with Fins. Representatives of ALPA, namely D. Woerth, signed a contract that limits my opportunities. Not only does that directly harm me it also was done to me by the president of the group that is supposed to protect my interests.

When we asked, via existing bylaws, for redress we were ignored.

I don't like suing my own either, but until someone can suggest a viable alternative that will get some kind of result it's our only option.

We are doing flying that mainline wanted no part of until two things happened. First, we got good at it. Second, they outpriced themselves and are now feeling the consequences of their actions.

One list protects us, restores their job security, and keeps management in check against whipsaw.

Unfortunately, despite overwhelming evidence to support the rationality of one list, a few mainline idiots are fighting it tooth and nail for what I can only surmise to be emotional and irrational reasons, namely ego. That's why RJDC exists and why it's a necessary, albeit unpleasant, reality.

 

[FL000]

Alright Prof, I'll give this a shot. This is the most I've said on this matter in 2 years, so it's not rehearsed and not eloquent.

Ok, both of you are against litigation to force ALPA to uphold their obligations to the dues paying members at ASA. What alternative do you propose that has not already been tried?

To be perfectly honest, I don't know. But that is the first time anyone has asked me. Personally, I don't think lawsuits are ever the answer. It's just not my style. I think its tacky, especially when it's against your brothers. I do allow for exceptions. For instance, Goldman vs. Simpson a few years ago in California was a real peach.

Also, I have some perspective. Let me explain. I left the miserable world of cubicles a few years ago. I now do what I love. I fly a great airplane. I work for a great company with great people. I have wonderful benefits. I already make more money than I would have had I stayed in the other career. I don't sit around and feel sorry for myself, thinking about how miserable my life and my job are.

Can it be better? Sure. But let's take it step by step, contract by contract. Not just our contract, but every other carrier's as well. Nature will take its course. As management pushes and pushes, further screwing every faction of DAL and DCI pilots (except the non-union ones) I think DALPA will see the benefit of one list. It might take a while, but I think we'll get there.

You know pilot mentality as well as I do. If you try to corner someone and force something on them, their going to come out furious and fighting. I'm talking about DALPA. If the RJDC is successful, you'd better like your job now because you won't have a friend anywhere else in the industry. We will become the red-headed, bastard brats. Hell, if the RJDC had been successful, every single ASA pilot would now be looking at hitting the street. EVERY SINGLE ONE. No wonder the senior guys don't like the idea.

The reason why I keep harping on this topic is because it is an important issue and many pilots have not figured out how all the parts fit together. Further, pilots like Toy Soldier should have a way of learning what is going on before committing to a job. (when I hired in I had no idea of the differences in upgrade potential at Eagle, for example)

I think you're scaring the crap out of pilots like Toy Soldier. If I were a pilot wanting to go to a major, especially Delta, I'd stay the hell away from DCI based on RJDC threats. I wouldn't want to sit in front of a panel at a Delta interview and try to explain my position on RJDC and how it's helping pilots in ALPA and DALPA. What's that you say? Support is anonymous? Sorry, I don't lie.

It is likely that I have failed to properly communicate what is going on, or that you do not care to learn the facts. Either way it is a loss for us collectively when our pilot group does not understand the issues well enough to use the opportunities provided on the Delta jumpseat to explain the issues that divide our union and provide positive solutions that enhance the careers of all pilots by working together.

Neither, Prof. You've done a great job explaining your side, and I have spent 2 years mulling the facts. It is funny that you think I'm ill-informed because I don't agree with you. It sounds like the rantings of the religious zealot you might find preaching on a street corner. It's much simpler than that: we have different opinions, period.

If I go of on an RJDC rant in the Delta jumpseat, I'm going to end up tugging my Samsonite up I-95. Quite frankly, I wouldn't blame the captain. I'm shocked to find that most of the Delta captains that I do jumpseat with (or they with me) are IN FAVOR of one list. This is a little known fact because they aren't going to give us any help when we are threatening to sue them. It's the ol' vinegar and honey thing, Prof. It's true in every aspect of life. It's an adage born in fundamental human behavior.

The friction between the pilot groups has nothing to do with it. DALPA is pushing to obtain RJ's at mainline - after all that is the way the current DALPA contract is written. ALPA has shown their support at US Air for just this type of solution.

If RJ's went to mainline (I assume you mean the 900s), this would complete the bridge that we need to cross the fuzzy border between our fleets. From those at DAL who are against one list, this is the primary argument that I hear: that we don't fly the same equipment. If we are flying 40, 50 and 70-seaters, and they are flying a 90-seat version of the same aircraft, then there's nothing in between; no division. In the long run, I think that would be a plus.

Regarding our own scope clause:

A good idea - but there are problems. First, ALPA does not want ASA and Comair performing 40% or more of Delta system flying. Potentially we would have enough votes to be a threat at the Board of Directors. Further, without DALPA's support there is no way we could negotiate this.

So to get DALPA's support you:

a) negotiate, explaining the merits of your case

b) sue 'em

As you pointed out, everyone seems to agree on one list once they understand that it will not cost them seniority, rank, or privledge. It really is the best solution for everyone, including the Delta pilots.

Again, the ends are not the point of contention. It's the means. I think even a lot of new Delta pilots would agree with your statement.

Man, I'm worn out. This is much more time than I ever wanted to spend on this topic. Please don't expect this kind of volley for each post. I just felt it was time that the silent majority got some air time.

Respectfully,
FL000

 

[~~~^~~~]

Caveman: Thanks - you write better than I do and are more succinct - help out any time you like!


IFF: I'm confused - you write:

The base goal is still the same. I don't want to be part of such an effort

You also write:

While I agree with your ultimate goals, a lawsuit isn't the answer. We need to scope non wholly owned airlines out and then work with DALPA for one list with a staple.

Don't you understand that ALPA will not allow the ASA MEC to negotiate with Delta? The ASA MEC has already been told that ASA management can not control Delta's allocation of Connection flying.

Have you ever asked a member of your LEC, or MEC, to engage in negotiations with Delta's MEC? What was the response they gave you?

Several of us did prepare and propose three resolutions at the last LEC meeting asking our representatives to engage in communications with DALPA if they were negotiating revised scope, or furlough protection using our jets - where you there? If you were there, you heard Bob Arnold say that they would not hold a vote on these resolutions and that approaching Delta, or the Delta MEC, over scope relief would "pi$$ off ALPA national" which is something we did not want to do just before asking for money to negotiate our next contract.

We have asked for DALPA's help. Their MEC Chairman, Will Burguey told Bob Arnold that "if (Delta) were to staple the ASA pilots, where would the military pilots go? You could not expect them to fly a Brazillia." Long story short is that DALPA does not care about ASA pilots and it is not their job to care about us. They are only interested in ASA when it threatens their narrow body domestic flying.

Litigation is my last choice - I do not like it either. However, there is just no other way to force both sides to the negotiation table.

If you know a better way, tell your MEC representatives to do it! Then kindly post your activities on the board and we will have something to talk about.

However, if you are doing nothing to protect your job except hoping for the generosity of ALPA and DALPA to help you, oh nevermind, it is redundant.

Who created scope? Who allowed domestic codeshare to begin in the first place? DALPA did - and you are waiting for them to fix this mess... come on IFF - get real.

 

[~~~^~~~]

FL000:

Thanks for your reasoned reply. Like you, I lived in a cubie, then lived in an office - 12 to 16 hours a day. Like you, this gave me a real appreciation for the job we do now, flying Delta's passengers on CRJ's. It is a great life.

That is the reason why I am so determined to protect my job and career expectations.

You write:

So to get DALPA's support you:

a) negotiate, explaining the merits of your case

b) sue 'em

That is exactly what we did. The PID presentation explained the merits of onelist to the ALPA Board of Directors. At this meeting the Chairman of the Delta MEC argued against onelist.

The RJDC again tried negotiating - to no avail.

Plan (b) is in progress and all of a sudden ALPA is in a mood to negotiate. They have explained that coordination with the Delta MEC will be required.

I hope for the best for all pilots in the employ of Delta Airlines, at least we are talking.

 

[ifly4food]

Prof,
I am being very real. And I'm sorry if you're confused because I won't agree with you.

What confuses me is that you keep saying "ALPA won't allow us to negotiate with Delta". Um, isn't that exactly what we're doing starting in September? Yes, technically we negotiate with ASA, but ASA is Delta is ASA. Skip gets his orders from the top. There is no reason whatsoever we can't get our own scope clause (similiar to the one DALPA got) limiting connection flying to wholly owned carriers.

I'm not waiting for DALPA to fix anything. I'm not waiting for a lawsuit to work itself through either. I'm saying we should fix our own mess and then once our ducks are in a row, ask DALPA for a staple. Even Flying Sig could agree with that.
As FL000 says, if the RJDC wins, we WILL be the black sheep of the industry. We will be right down there with scabs. It isn't the way to go.
I will support RJDC when they drop the lawsuit and pursue the goale we have discussed in a diplomatic manner.

In closing, we really have bigger fish to fry than to argue about the merits of the RJDC. We need to be focusing on our upcoming negotiations and pulling together- not drawing apart as the RJDC is clearly causing us to do. We are already going into negotiations in a extremely weak position. Unity is all we have. We need to focus and speak with one voice when it's time to play hardball.

Prof, I ask you this... whose team are you gonna be on?

 

[~~~^~~~]

IFF, I love debating you. Ok here we go:

You write:

What confuses me is that you keep saying "ALPA won't allow us to negotiate with Delta".

There was a letter on the ALPA board from Cohen, Weiss and Simon to Bob Arnold. This letter explained that the ASA MEC could only negotiate with ASA management. It further explained that in the union's view ASA was not Delta. Bob Arnold took the letter down, but you can probably still get a copy from our MEC's offices 404-763-4935.

Since ALPA is the sole bargaining agent, we can not go outside ALPA national's directives and negotiate with Delta. Our MEC does not have that authority.

Since Delta does not want ASA pilots to interfere with their domestic flying, they gladly point to ALPA's letter and tell us "we can not talk to you."

Simply - it is impossible for the ASA MEC to scope anything done by the parent company because we can only negotiate with the subsidiary.

You write:

We are already going into negotiations in a extremely weak position.

And why is that? Because we have five groups of pilots performing Delta domestic flying.

You write:

Unity is all we have. We need to focus and speak with one voice when it's time to play hardball. Prof, I ask you this... whose team are you gonna be on?

I am going to be on the side who has the ball and which is moving it down the field. Justice has never been won by the timid.

ALPA is treating the ASA MEC with more respect that they ever have because they know there may be legal ramifications if they fail to represent us.

When you read Flying the Line I and II, you realize that ALPA has always been in a weak position when it allowed alter ego airlines to compete for the same flying. E.L. Cord did this at American, Lorenzo at Continental and now you and I are feeling the effects going into this contract.

ALPA may need a "bad guy" to force them into doing the right thing. At the time, Martin Luther King was thought to be a troublemaker - just like anyone else that rocks the boat in the pursuit of what is right.

I'm no Martin Luther King, but I am willing to fight for what I believe in. So what have you done? I'd like to know if you have talked to any of your representatives, and what reply you got.

 

[ifly4food]

You keep baiting me by inviting me to discuss this with our MEC reps. I have to be honest... I haven't. Between flying naps, commuting from waaay up north and spending time with my family, I just haven't gotten there yet.
Your explanation of why we can't negotiate our own version of scope seems plausible. I guess I'll just have to go ask Mike or someone else if it really works out that way. For now I guess I'll have to take your word for it.
It's clear that we agree that we are very weak because of the alter ego threat. The new CEO of DCI has now openly stated that he would like to see DCI flying go to the "lowest cost provider" and that he isn't opposed to bringing in new companies to fly Delta passengers.
I would like to know what your solution to this problem is if we can't simply scope them out. Are you really saying that our only hope of settling our contract and protecting our flying is to sue ALPA?
You mention Bob Arnold a lot. I get the impression that you think we would could use different leadership. You have to understand that he's walking a thin line. Just like the Comair MEC, they have to play nice with the RJDC thing. They do, after all, work for ALPA. I'm not sure what you expect from him. However, if the MEC got a unified response from us, the pilots of ASA, they would have no choice but to take on national and get permission to negotiate scope with ASA and Delta. As it is, why stick your neck out if it isn't necessary.
While we divide ourselves into factions, the MEC will go without guidance, and thus take the easy road... to not fight ALPA national. With unity, we can force them to do what's right even if it's not easy. The RJDC isn't the answer to this. Whether it's agenda has changed or not, the stigma is still there. It will never garner the support needed at ASA to carry our intentions to those who can do something about it.

You say you will be on the side that has the ball, and I agree that justice is never won by the timid. However, moving the ball never lasts without a solid game strategy and a strong team to support the front line. Even Martin Luther King knew that he would go nowhere if he didn't have support. He knew how to fight when necessary, but apease when required.
Does the RJDC?

 

[~~~^~~~]

IFF: Thanks for your reply.

Either Bob Arnold, or Mike White is a good source on the scope issue. Again, reading the letter for yourself is the best information. (I wish it was still on the MEC site)

Candidly I like Bob Arnold a lot. He is a smart politician and does a good job of advocating pilot issues to ASA management.

However, we provided written guidance to our LEC in the form of resolutions proposed at the last LEC meeting. These resolutions were supported by a majority of pilots present, plus many pilots had provided proxies so their vote could be counted in absentia.

Bob Arnold blocked the vote from taking place. Now when our representative refuses to represent the pilots, I believe it is serious. Like you said, Bob is trying to place nice with ALPA national right now.

You write:

I would like to know what your solution to this problem is if we can't simply scope them out. Are you really saying that our only hope of settling our contract and protecting our flying is to sue ALPA?

The best solution is onelist - all Delta flying by Delta pilots. Here is how we get there:
(1) We have to negotiate with ALPA & DALPA.
(2) ALPA and DALPA have refused to even let us participate in the process - so we have to bring them to the table by whatever means necessary - that unfortunately means - sue them.
(3) ALPA and DALPA have to abandon scope that separates the pilot groups.
(4) Once scope is gone ALPA & DALPA will want "all pilots performing Delta flying" on one list so that they can control "Delta flying."

Of course there are also other ways to get there. Since ALPA refused onelist, the RJDC asked for revisions in the Constitution and Bylaws which would provide for a system of checks and balances - like the Senate balances the power of Congress and the Supreme Court balances the President's power. The intent of these revisions to the CB&L would be to give "small jet" pilots a voice in the contracts that control our wages and working conditions. (ALPA said they could not do that - but that is another story)

ALPA is run by pure majority rule. Repeatedly the union has got into trouble when they took unfair advantage of minority member groups. ALPA has been to the Courthouse and lost many times. Since there are no checks and balances the majority within ALPA these sorts of problems are not that unusual.

ALPA does not want to give the power of representation to minority pilot groups. They would rather onelist so they can control us under a single MEC, which is fine with me.

What we have to watch out for when we seek alternatives to onelist is the kind of problems the Continental Express pilots have. ALPA gave them one MEC under two lists. As you can imagine the Express pilots get no representation at all. They are now wishing that they had a separate MEC.

So onelist is the best answer to fix whipsaw while protecting the Delta pilots as well as those pilots at Connection.

The Delta pilots could control all Delta flying by controlling the pilots who fly Delta's aircraft. The smart move is to bring these pilots together - like the founding fathers of our nation brought together the 13 colonies to form the United States.

If the RJDC makes ALPA's stupid move of predatory scope more painful than the good move of unity within our union, then the RJDC has served a useful purpose.

 

[~~~^~~~]

IFF: Thanks for your reply.

Either Bob Arnold, or Mike White is a good source on the scope issue. Again, reading the letter for yourself is the best information. (I wish it was still on the MEC site)

Candidly I like Bob Arnold a lot. He is a smart politician and does a good job of advocating pilot issues to ASA management.

However, we provided written guidance to our LEC in the form of resolutions proposed at the last LEC meeting. These resolutions were supported by a majority of pilots present, plus many pilots had provided proxies so their vote could be counted in absentia.

Bob Arnold blocked the vote from taking place. Now when our representative refuses to represent the pilots, I believe it is serious. Like you said, Bob is trying to place nice with ALPA national right now.

You write:

I would like to know what your solution to this problem is if we can't simply scope them out. Are you really saying that our only hope of settling our contract and protecting our flying is to sue ALPA?

The best solution is onelist - all Delta flying by Delta pilots. Here is how we get there:
(1) We have to negotiate with ALPA & DALPA.
(2) ALPA and DALPA have refused to even let us participate in the process - so we have to bring them to the table by whatever means necessary - that unfortunately means - sue them.
(3) ALPA and DALPA have to abandon scope that separates the pilot groups.
(4) Once scope is gone ALPA & DALPA will want "all pilots performing Delta flying" on one list so that they can control "Delta flying."

Of course there are also other ways to get there. Since ALPA refused onelist, the RJDC asked for revisions in the Constitution and Bylaws which would provide for a system of checks and balances - like the Senate balances the power of Congress and the Supreme Court balances the President's power. The intent of these revisions to the CB&L would be to give "small jet" pilots a voice in the contracts that control our wages and working conditions. (ALPA said they could not do that - but that is another story)

ALPA is run by pure majority rule. Repeatedly the union has got into trouble when they took unfair advantage of minority member groups. ALPA has been to the Courthouse and lost many times. Since there are no checks and balances the majority within ALPA these sorts of problems are not that unusual.

ALPA does not want to give the power of representation to minority pilot groups. They would rather onelist so they can control us under a single MEC, which is fine with me.

What we have to watch out for when we seek alternatives to onelist is the kind of problems the Continental Express pilots have. ALPA gave them one MEC under two lists. As you can imagine the Express pilots get no representation at all. They are now wishing that they had a separate MEC.

So onelist is the best answer to fix whipsaw while protecting the Delta pilots as well as those pilots at Connection.

The Delta pilots could control all Delta flying by controlling the pilots who fly Delta's aircraft. The smart move is to bring these pilots together - like the founding fathers of our nation brought together the 13 colonies to form the United States.

If the RJDC makes ALPA's stupid move of predatory scope more painful than the good move of unity within our union, then the RJDC has served a useful purpose.

P.S. I tried to send you a message on your flica question - but your mailbox is full. Regards!

 

[ifly4food]

Here is how we get there:

(1) We have to negotiate with ALPA & DALPA.

But how? Can you blame them for not wanting to negotiate while we're suing them?

(2) ALPA and DALPA have refused to even let us participate in the process - so we have to bring them to the table by whatever means necessary - that unfortunately means - sue them.

Maybe they would be more willing now that things have changed in the industry... if we weren't suing them.

(3) ALPA and DALPA have to abandon scope that separates the pilot groups.

Or they have to let us form our own version of predatory scope to protect our flying. Instead of forcing them, let's give them an offer they can't refuse. End alter ego, and keep non-union Skywest out.

(4) Once scope is gone ALPA & DALPA will want "all pilots performing Delta flying" on one list so that they can control "Delta flying."

You don't think Delta mgt. will seize that opportunity once scope is gone to further hose the Delta pilots? Agreed that onelist is the solution, but we need to do it in a way that makes DALPA want it. And I'm assuming once the above happens, ASA and Comair will no longer exist so that we can negotiate directly with Delta, i.e. we will be Delta pilots?

The Delta pilots could control all Delta flying by controlling the pilots who fly Delta's aircraft. The smart move is to bring these pilots together - like the founding fathers of our nation brought together the 13 colonies to form the United States.

They have no motive to bring us together right now. We need to give them a reason to do so. As far as controlling us, I think they've succeeded there, don't you?

If the RJDC makes ALPA's stupid move of predatory scope more painful than the good move of unity within our union, then the RJDC has served a useful purpose.

But it's only further divided the union. And I don't think it's caused nearly as much pain as some think it has. I would rate is like a bee sting to ALPA... annoying, slightly painful, but hardly life threatening.

 

[~~~^~~~]

DALPA did not love us before we sued, they will not love us if we dismiss the lawsuit.

The harm ALPA caused by not representing the ASA pilots was a choice they made. There is no reason why they would choose differently now that there is even more pressure on the union to protect the highly paid pilot's jobs first.

I thank God that the Comair plaintiffs got that suit in before September 11th.

Again, any time ALPA wants the lawsuit to go away they can pick up the phone, invite our representatives to participate in the re-negotiations that are going on at Delta right now and allow us the opportunity to vote on the contract which affects our career and job opportunities.

ALPA has not been put in a box. Quite to the contrary - they could file a single carrier petitiion, a policy implementation date for a merger, or revise scope.

And yes, a 100 million demand with 600 million in actual damages is serious to a union with about 70 million in assetts.

 

[FlyingSig]

Also, everything depends on growth. ASA is not currently growing, but there is much debate on this board on what the future holds.

I was re-reading some posts and this statement kinda jumped out at me....

The fact that you are basing your budget on something that has not materialized seems to me more like poor financial planning instead of an actual "pay scale". Delta management tried that arguement during the last set of negotiations. They said that we should accept their pay scales because they are going to order a whole bunch of airplanes and we'd all be MD88 Captains in 4 years..... seems like you're buying off pretty good on a management trick.

When you are hired by an airline you know what the published first officer rates are. Once you make captain or transition to larger equipment they too have a published pay scale and when you're actually in the seat you can adjust your personal budget accordingly.

If the yes/no decision to go work for a company is based on making Captain in xx amount of time you picked the wrong industry.

Ok...back to reading now....