Brand Scope

[KeroseneSnorter]

Inclusive,

Just curious what kind of scope clauses Comair and ASA have in their contract. After all, if you guys are successful in getting DAL to give up all their scope clauses, what kind of protections do you guys have in place to keep DAL management from farming your flying out to the lowest bidder? I'm sure Mesa or a similar outfit would jump in tooth and nail to pick up all those juicy contracts.

 

[wms]

If brand scope is only defined by action, then the RJDC's view of ALPA's definition of brand scope is subjective. This letter is just another group's perspective of what ALPA's view of brand scope is, based on the actions of individual carriers and MECs. Brand scope means something different at each airline, and the ASA/CA MECs should ask Malone exactly what DALPAs intentions are. And the RJDC should stop jumping to conclusions and getting everyone worked up without having the details. If there are the good relations between the MECs that everyone is talking about, then these questions may have been already asked.

Unless I'm mistaken, brand scope primarily limits the out sourcing of flying. For us it means contract carriers, and for ML it limits DCI flying. It's natural for each group to want to protect their interests and we should find a way to do it that benefits us all. Without the "portfolio" it would be easier for ML to grow with out impacting the WOs, and the WOs could grow without encroaching on ML.

But the fact remains that DAL owns the flying, and everyone is jockeying for a piece of the pie. The fact is the group most likely to get it is the one that can have the most impact on the company. That is the DAL pilots. The WOs are powerless, and the best way to get a share of the pot is to solict the help of the one's with influence. That's just plain ole diplomacy. The RJDC and others don't want to admit we need help, but would rather try to force things at the risk of poor relations than be diplomatic and work together.

Most DCI pilots don't want a career with a commuter, but we would like to have it good while we're here. Good relations with the parent company and with the other employee groups will help.

I, along with most pilots here, don't pay dues to the RJDC and am not a member. I am fed up that they have given the impression to the industry and others that they are our representatives, without my consent. Kind of like...

 

[wms]

Inclusive,

Just curious what kind of scope clauses Comair and ASA have in their contract. After all, if you guys are successful in getting DAL to give up all their scope clauses, what kind of protections do you guys have in place to keep DAL management from farming your flying out to the lowest bidder? I'm sure Mesa or a similar outfit would jump in tooth and nail to pick up all those juicy contracts.

We have no scope clause, and we don't have the power to negotiate for it. That's why it needs to be included in the negotiations between DAL and DALPA.

The first mention I heard of brand scope here was when our negotiations began and our MEC wanted it in the contract to limit out-sourcing of flying. But they cannot bring it to the table because DAL owns the flying and the individual WO DCI carriers have no authority to negotiate it.

Out-sourcing, just like a DCI merger, has to be negotiated at the parent company, and there is only one employee group with the ability to do it.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Unless I'm mistaken, brand scope primarily limits the out sourcing of flying. For us it means contract carriers, and for ML it limits DCI flying.

So since a judge would never strip DAL pilots of their brand scope unless they stripped DCI pilots of theirs. (Judges always try to not set a double standard) What does the RJDC hope to gain by the lawsuit and forced removal of their scope protections?

No wonder DAL management is siding with the RJDC, If the RJDC is successful in nullifying DALPAS scope they have also given DAL management free reign to contract out massive amounts of DCI flying also. It is a win win situation for DAL management and the only losers are DAL and DCI pilots.

Seems silly to me. Right now all DAL flying is in house so to speak. If the RJDC is successful it will be a bigger mess than USAir has going on over there.

 

[surplus1]

Inclusive,

Just curious what kind of scope clauses Comair and ASA have in their contract. After all, if you guys are successful in getting DAL to give up all their scope clauses, what kind of protections do you guys have in place to keep DAL management from farming your flying out to the lowest bidder? I'm sure Mesa or a similar outfit would jump in tooth and nail to pick up all those juicy contracts.

You make an excellent observation. Comair has no scope that protects its flying. Why that is so is a long story, but the bottom line is it does not exist.

 

[surplus1]

If brand scope is only defined by action, then the RJDC's view of ALPA's definition of brand scope is subjective. This letter is just another group's perspective of what ALPA's view of brand scope is, based on the actions of individual carriers and MECs. Brand scope means something different at each airline, and the ASA/CA MECs should ask Malone exactly what DALPAs intentions are. And the RJDC should stop jumping to conclusions and getting everyone worked up without having the details. If there are the good relations between the MECs that everyone is talking about, then these questions may have been already asked.

The RJDC's view of "brand scope" may indeed be subjective. If ALPA would like the view to be more objective, then why hasn't ALPA defined what it means by "brand scope"? Instead what ALPA has done is banter around a new buzz phrase, with no definition, which it toutes as the answer to who knows what. If brand scope means something different at each airline, as you say, why should we be rushing to embrace it at Comair when we have no idea what it means?

You suggest that we ask Malone exactly what DALPA's intentions are? Are you truly naieve enough to believe that he would tell us that? Haven't you figured out that part of the problem is exactly that, i.e., we have no idea what the Delta pilots may be negotiating with respect to our jobs. The RJDC Is "worked up" precisely because we don't have the details and another pilot group is using our future as a bargaining chip in their negotiations. Where have you been?

Good relations between MEC's? What good relations? If these good relations exist and the MEC's have told each other what they are doing, then why hasn't your MEC told you? If Malone has told them what his intentions are, with respect to Comair pilots, why don't you know; why is the MEC keeping it a secret from us? Well, I'll tell you... they are not keeping it a secret, the fact is they have no idea what DALPA intends to do; not a clue. While they are busy telling you about the "good relations", the other group, DALPA, could be busily bargaining away what little we have now. Don't be so gullible, please. They have a history and it has never been favorable to us.

Unless I'm mistaken, brand scope primarily limits the out sourcing of flying.

Are you sure that's what it means? You aren't are you? If you really knew what it means you wouldn't be saying "unless I'm mistaken". That's the whole point of the debate, i.e., nobody really knows exactly what brand scope means.
You may not like the RJDC, but given the examples of what ALPA has already done, it's not too hard to guess what "brand scope" means to them. It means what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine and it's all about protecting one group (the mainline) by giving them even more control over another group (the regionals). You can believe as you choose, but I sure don't want Malone or any other Delta pilot deciding my future. I don't want Woerth doing it either. And, I also don't want my fellow pilots telling me that I should want those things. Myabe you don't have much of an investment in this airline, but I have a BIG investment that I intend to protect. I'm not willing to give it up because you have little interest and little stake.

I agree that "we should find a way" to protect our interests together. We of Comair have been offering to sit down and do just that for many years. Probably long before you got here. The other side, DALPA, has never had any interest in that. There is no longer any need to pretend that they will suddenly change their ways. They have no stake in anything other than their own interests and those include getting rid of us if they can. We need to worry more about taking care of ourselves and less about what they think.

But the fact remains that DAL owns the flying, and everyone is jockeying for a piece of the pie. The fact is the group most likely to get it is the one that can have the most impact on the company. That is the DAL pilots. The WOs are powerless, and the best way to get a share of the pot is to solict the help of the one's with influence.

Yes, Delta does own the flying. Let's be sure you understand that means Delta Air Lines, not the Delta pilots. You know why the regionals are powerless, as you put it? It is because there are too many folks like you that are brainwashed into believing that. Yes, we're jockeying for a piece of the pie. The truth is we had a peice and they had a peice and nobody was complaining. They are the ones that got greedy and decided to take a bigger peice, from us. That's what started the dispute. If we allow them to take whatever they want whenever they want it, in short order there will be nothing left, they will have it all. That is what they want and that is what ALPA's "brand scope" is designed to give them.

It's a Trojan Horse in the middle of your camp. Please wake up and smell the coffee.

The RJDC and others don't want to admit we need help, but would rather try to force things at the risk of poor relations than be diplomatic and work together.

Nothing but "poor relations" has existed for more than ten years. Where were you? The RJDC and others, like me, know very well that we need all the help we can get. The problem is being able to identify where that help should come from. It comes from within. The help we need is our own unity, not some kind of handout from the very people that make the need for help necessary.

What you say makes it clear that your abitions to one day go to the mainline because you don't want a "career with a commuter" is exactly why you are willing to bend over and grab your ankles. I have no problem with you prefering to fly for Delta than Comair. Get out your resume package and apply and I wish you good luck. While you're still here don't mess it up for the rest of us by giving away what we have because you think it will help to get you there. It will not help at all.

I, along with most pilots here, don't pay dues to the RJDC and am not a member. I am fed up that they have given the impression to the industry and others that they are our representatives, without my consent. Kind of like...

You are fed up because you say the RJDC is giving the impression that they are our representatives. Is that right? Well, I haven't heard the RJDC say that at all. I give to the RJDC because I want to and it is voluntary. The RJDC does not collect "dues" from anyone and it does not claim to represent anyone that hasn't volunteered to be represented.

What you don't seem to grasp is that every individual member of the union has a right to have his/her interests fairly represented by the union. In our opinion, the union has not done that, is not doing that, and has no plans to do that. We pay for that and we are suing to get what we pay for; fair representation.

Every month both you and I are required to pay 1.95% of our gross income to a labor union that does not represent our interests, and that assists another pilot group to assault our job security and take from our future. It is not optional, it is mandatory. If you don't pay it they can get you fired. How come you're not fed up with that? Is it because you think they are going to help you to leave your commuter airline and become a real pilot at Delta?

You can call it "diplomacy" if you want to but there comes a time when diplomacy fails and action is required. Action presents two options; surrender or fight for your rights. Your choice appears to be surrender; my choice is to fight for what is mine.

 

[General Lee]

Surplus1,


Did ALPA help you at all during your strike? You claim they did nothing--yet Leo Mullin is the one who outlasted you. We could not do anything else at Mainline but watch (since Pres Bush and his team were watching us)--and we hoped for the best and gave you cash to help you try to outlast them. You really like to forget that part.....

Also, which subsidiary of our company--Delta mainline or DCI--has expanded the most in the last three years? Hmmmmm. You will say it is because we were too expensive----which really isn't the case over the past two and a half years. The reason we parked so many aircraft is because the passenger base got smaller after 9-11, and now they are back! Guess what that means? It means it is time for us to reclaim the flying that was handed to you when we lacked passengers. But, you and your RJDC friends (thugs) don't like that. Why don't you guys focus on something else that really does affect your future income and earning potential---like the new Jetblue rates. Call your RJDC buddies and see if they can shoot over a "mean" letter to David Neeleman--I am sure he will just laugh it off too.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[~~~^~~~]

The reason we parked so many aircraft is because the passenger base got smaller after 9-11, and now they are back! Guess what that means? It means it is time for us to reclaim the flying that was handed to you when we lacked passengers.

General :

Great, we agree! Lets roll back scope to where it was before Contract 96! Or, how about the contract 96 version.

What you don't seem to realize is that ALPA has been lowering scope bar. The trend is already from 105 seats to 50 seats going from 96 to 2000, plus a host of other limitations.

Is your intent to scope us all the way back to the Twin Otter? If so, we are going to have to install a crew rest station to fly some of our routes.

 

[General Lee]

Fins,


A twinotter flight from ATL to ICT would be great. The room in the back for passengers is about the same as in an RJ---but you might be able to put one bag in the overhead. Remember, you are paid by the hour....

I know you had 146's back in the '96 contract---and since then you have increased your flying at Delta to what percent? 47%? Sounds like a bunch of new upgrades for a lot of people. Now the passengers are back (for 1/2 the fare), and we need larger aircraft on some routes to compete against the ever expanding LCCs---and we lack the larger aircraft. It just makes sense that you cannot expand forever--and your days of unlimited expansion have slowed for now. Don't worry Fins---we will eventually hire again (after huge pay cuts)---and you will have a possible chance (my lawyer speak) of getting on with "Delta Ulimited Mainline Bus Associated Sanctioned Serivce" or "Dumba$$" for short--which will be our new A318 service. Pay rates will be LESS THAN Jetblue's, but you will be able to "fly a stick" and look like one too! I will give you your IOE---it will be fun! (bring extra money--you are buying dinner!)

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[wms]

What I should say is that my belief of what brand scope should be is the elimination of out-sourcing. If it means something to someone else, then I would have to hear it before I passed judgement. Not from a third party's perception, but from the horses mouth. And like you, I want our reps to find out what DALPAs intentions are, and to pass it along.

I don't agree with what ALPA has done at other airlines and I'm guarded about what may happen here as a result. It's unnerving to know that there may be negotiations going on that could affect us. But it's presumptuous to assume the actual provisions of any agreement until there is a TA. The only J4J or flow-through banter has been here from people who are spreading rumors, and from no credible source.

A better way to ensure our protections is with open communications, not creating barriers of animosity. We're not going to find out what's happening behind closed doors if we enrage the one's with the keys. And law suits don't lead to dialogue. The RJDCs conception that they can affect change in or out of court is wrong, and though there may be a victory or two, litigation will do more damage in the long run. Whether we want to admit it or not, we have no bargaining power, and are forced to humbly approach those who do.

RJDC doesn't offically represent all regional pilots, but ask other employee groups what the percentage of contributing RJDC supporters are and I bet they'll say it's more than what it actually is. The impression is that the RJDC has a greater following than it does because it throws itself around as though it does.

If the RJDC really represented the majority they would be seeking a concensus of all commuter pilots, not just a few. No one I know has been asked by the RJDC how we feel about their views or actions.They have been acting unilaterally doing things the majority of us don't want them to do, under the guise of our reprentatives.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus1,
The reason we parked so many aircraft is because the passenger base got smaller after 9-11, and now they are back! Guess what that means? It means it is time for us to reclaim the flying that was handed to you when we lacked passengers.

General,

I'll say again as I've said before, over and over, and over. Neither I nor anyone I know in the RJDC has any objection to Delta replacing any Comair flight with a mainline flight. I repeat, NO OBJECTION. If the route warrants one of your aircraft in preference to one of ours, the Company should use it.

The issues that divide us have nothing to do with the Company's selection and assignment of one or more of the aircraft types that you fly, to any route that we fly. That is how it is supposed to work.

The problem is your attempt to prevent the Company from selecting the right aircraft type or from assigning the right aircraft type, unless you fly it.

You know this but you keep trying to spin your predatory intent into your being victimized by RJ's. The same old story in the same old way. A political lie that serves your interests. The threat of the RJ is like the WMD of Iraq. Nonexistant.

We believe that market forces must determine the type aircarft that is best for a route and the Company, not the Delta pilots, must decide how many aircraft and what type it will chose to deploy from time to time.

You argue about the aircraft and its comfort and a lot of other diversionary tactics, but you can't hide the truth. Your issue is not really about the aircraft, it is about who flies it. You would not complain at all if the RJs were flown by Delta pilots. You are complaining because they are flown by ASA and Comair and other pilots.

Well my friend, the only way they can be flown by Delta pilots is if you replace the pilots that fly them now. Comair pilots are not willing to allow you to replace us.

When it is too hard for you to replace us directly at Comair, which thanks to the Company it has been so far, you change your strategy by attempting to transfer the 70-seat equipment to yourselves. To us (and secretly to you), that is the equivalent of replacing us. Move the 70-seat jets from Comair to Delta and we will lose 270 positions in that type and in turn furlough 270 of our most junior pilots. Not because these aircraft are not needed, but because YOU want to fly them in our place. As yet you have not succeeded in this transfer because the Company has refused to agree. However, our union has no problem with supporting your efforts.

You have artificially restricted the total number of 70-seat aircraft that the Company may deploy. In other words, if you can't fly them nobody else can fly them (sounds just like the NW pilots, but I digress). The net result of your action which altered the status quo from "unlimited" to only 57 overall, has directly damaged the promotion opportunities of all Comair pilots and reduced their income, real and potential, by millions of dollars. Not only does this not bother you, you actually believe that we should applaud your behavior. Think again, that is not going to happen.

But, you and your RJDC friends (thugs) don't like that. Why don't you guys focus on something else that really does affect your future income and earning potential---like the new Jetblue rates. Call your RJDC buddies and see if they can shoot over a "mean" letter to David Neeleman--I am sure he will just laugh it off too.

You are correct, I and my RJDC friends do NOT like that. If it makes you feel better, call us thugs. You remind me of the pilgrims who called the Indians savages when they objected to the theft of their land. Perhaps, like the Indians we will eventually lose this struggle but one thing you can be certain of, General. We will fight for what is ours. We may be thugs, but you are thieves. Personally, I'd rather be a thug than a theif.

Yes, the low rates at JetBlue will affect us but do not gloat too soon for it will affect you also. You are the ones that want this airplane, you are the ones that would normally be flying it should the Company decide to buy. Yours are the wages that will have to go down if you want to get it and the pressure of those low wages may well cause the Company to consider giving it to us.

Yes, I know that your Scope clause prevents that. Well, remember when your scope clause didn't care how many 70-seaters we flew? I do. You changed it, because you wanted to and the Company let you. My friend, when the Company wants to and feels like it guess what, it can and will be changed again.

So don't crow too loudly about how much the JBlue rates will hurt us. They may well hurt you as much or more.

Greed is a vice.

 

[General Lee]

Surplus1,


Ok, what? First of all, the company and Dalpa can negotiate on any NEW airplane--and there really is NOTHING you guys can do about it. IF we for some reason wanted to negotiate for ultra new 7E7s---do we have to ask you guys first? Ummmm, no. How about new CR7s? Nope. We can negotiate about anything. Now, we are the ones being grilled (look at the new proposal---they want $1 billion a year from us...) and we have the right to negotiate for something in return. I haven't seen Dalpa ask for your current CR7s, and I don't know if they will. It does look like NW will be asking for and getting new 70 seaters---and I can see your worry. Delta is asking us right now for significant savings---and that will come from a large pay cut primarily. To get that savings from you---they would have to cut all of your pay by 130%---leaving you to pay them 30% extra out of your pockets. So, since they cannot get that kind of cash form you guys---they will come to us and we will negotiate for something in return. That is how it works unfortunately. You, my friend, don't seem to understand that. Delta is looking for a certain amount of cuts---and you can not provide them with that---so they will deal with us--and we will get something in return.

As far as the Jetblue rates go---I think they will affect us--no doubt. I totally expect Dalpa to eventually capitulate on smaller aircraft---like a 100 seater---I have heard the A318 and then the A319s and A320s to replace the MD-88s/737-300s etc.----and for that A318 (or whatever) have a "Jetblue type" rate---maybe $70-80 bucks per hour for the Capt, and $50 for the FO. Then they would limit the number of 100 seaters--maybe to 100 etc so the company doesn't run wild with the low pay grade idea. That might save them additional money right there--and then that would be added to our next proposal. The Jetblue factor will hurt us, and will hurt you too---I have no doubt in that. I am sure Delta management is aware of all of that--including NWALPA's proposal---and how mcuh that is worth too. I don't think you could beat us in a deal--even if we "allowed it." That is truely a sad thing, though...


Greed is a vice, but what about survival and instinct? Wanting a lot more growth even after three years of solid growth and plenty of furloughs on the sidelines (Delta furloughs and DCI growth)---that sounds greedy to me....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[surplus1]

What I should say is that my belief of what brand scope should be is the elimination of out-sourcing. If it means something to someone else, then I would have to hear it before I passed judgement. Not from a third party's perception, but from the horses mouth. And like you, I want our reps to find out what DALPAs intentions are, and to pass it along.

Now you're beginning to think. I urge you to continue that because the job you save will be your own.

You say that "brand scope should be the elimination of our-sourcing". That sounds good, but do your realize that to a Delta pilot, that means the elimination of all of DCI, including Comair and ASA. Is that the same as what you mean or are you just talking about SKYW and CHQ and ACA's replacement?

Be careful what you ask for, you might get it. Think this through, please. Until the "horses mouth" puts the definition of "brand scope" in writing, the fact is we do NOT know what it really means. Do I trust ALPA to protect my interests? The answer is no, I do not. Why haven't they (ALPA) clearly defined the meaning of brand scope? You tell me.

I don't agree with what ALPA has done at other airlines and I'm guarded about what may happen here as a result. It's unnerving to know that there may be negotiations going on that could affect us. But it's presumptuous to assume the actual provisions of any agreement until there is a TA. The only J4J or flow-through banter has been here from people who are spreading rumors, and from no credible source.

Well perhaps it is presumptious to assume the provisions of an agreement, I'll give you that. Now let me ask you this: If there is a TA and if that TA proves the presumptions were accurate, what can we do to change it? Answer: Absolutely nothing. Therefore, the only way we can prevent disaster is to "head 'em off at the pass." If they really were'nt planning a J4J gambit or some weird flow through, neither one of us has lost anything. If they were and we prevented it, then we have also prevent the loss of our job security and our seniority.

Since the job security that we have now is highly tenuous, the Lord knows we don't need to risk any more of it by assuming good will from people with a record of greed and avarice.

You have seen what ALPA has done, not once but over and over again. There has been not one word of regret and no promise real or pretended that they will not do it again. Exposing ourselves to the assumption of good will on their part would candidly, be stupid. Let them prove the good will when we are not vulnerable to ill will. Forewarned is forearmed.

A better way to ensure our protections is with open communications, not creating barriers of animosity. We're not going to find out what's happening behind closed doors if we enrage the one's with the keys. And law suits don't lead to dialogue. The RJDCs conception that they can affect change in or out of court is wrong, and though there may be a victory or two, litigation will do more damage in the long run. Whether we want to admit it or not, we have no bargaining power, and are forced to humbly approach those who do.

We have created no barriers. Our "friends" simply do not find it necessary to communicate unless we first agree to do as they wish. That is not communication it is dictation. The one's with the keys to the door you imagine have no intention of opening it regardless of whether you frown or you smile. This process of attempting to communicate did not begin today or yesterday. In fact it began in 1991. We have been attempting to communicate since then but the frequency is always jammed. This entire process has a history, WMS. You just don't happen to know what that history is. Don't take my word for it, investigate and find out.

Look, I'm a Comair pilot. It is not my purpose in life to be unfriendly towards the pilots of any other airline. I don't have an axe to grind with Delta and they have nothing that I want. However, it appears that we, me and my fellow pilots have something that they want and they are prepared to get it any way they can. Charity begins at home. I will defend the rights of Comair pilots any day of the week and twice on Sunday, BEFORE I defend any Delta pilot. I'm not against Delta pilots, I'm just for Comair pilots. My brothers come first! My distant cousins are second.

The perception that change can be effected in the courts is not wrong. At the very least litigation keeps the wolf from the door temporarily. A successful outcome will keep it out of the house permanently. It will take nothing from any Delta pilot, it will simply prevent them from taking from us. With some luck it will also set a precedent and prevent ALPA from further predatory actions against other regional pilot members.

The truth is is doesn't matter how many pilots support the RJDC. There were only 3 names on this lawsuit when it began and there only needs to be one when it ends. It doesn't matter whether the union violates the rights of one pilot or ten thousand pilots. The bottom line is the union must not violate the rights of any member. That's what this is about.

If the majority of black people wanted slavery, it would not make slavery right. When the majority were coerced into accepting segregation for 150 years, it did not make segregation right. If the majority of regional pilots are willing to ignore unfair representation of their interests, it doesn't make it right. We are all equal members of the Air Line Pilots Association and the union must represent us fairly without regard to where we happen to be employed. It may not legally favor the USAirways pilots over the Allegheny pilots, or the Mesa pilots over the CCAir pilots, or the American Pilots over the Eagle pilots or the Delta pilots over the Comair pilots.

We must all be represented and represented fairly. That is the purpose of the RJDC movement. I don't support it because of how many "members" it has, I support it because the principles for which it stands are the right ones. I'm sorry you can't see that.

The fact that you refer to youself as a "commuter pilot" is indicative that you do not find sufficient self esteem in the job you currently have. You obviously consider yourself to be inferior in some way. I do not share your views. I'm not a commuter pilot, I'm an airline pilot and I have been for a very long time. If I worked for Delta I would be a richer airline pilot but what I am or how I see myself would not change.

The fact that you haven't learned that yet and you see yourself as a "commuter pilot" is the very reason why the pilots of small airlines have allowed themselves to become the victims of the pilots of large airlines and their own labor union. That needs to end and with a little bit of luck, we will end it.

I would like to do that with your support but if that is impossible, I will still try without it. We shall overcome.