CMR -700 rumor

[ATR-DRIVR]

You sure those are the 700's? I was under the impression from the "training" day that those were going to be 200's.

 

[InclusiveScope]

Well, "InclusiveScope", I merely passed along what "Fins to the Left" told me the other day in the Bada Bing lounge. Why don't you go ask him instead of attacking me?

I did ask him, and his account isn't the same as yours. He says his conversation with you regarding this issue had nothing to do with RJDC. Why do you insist on attacking RJDC while giving ALPA a free ride? I am attacking you because you persist in attacking RJDC. If you continue to attack the RJDC, I will continue to attack you. See ya on 30th.

 

[ifly4food]

I did ask him, and his account isn't the same as yours. He says his conversation with you regarding this issue had nothing to do with RJDC. Why do you insist on attacking RJDC while giving ALPA a free ride? I am attacking you because you persist in attacking RJDC. If you continue to attack the RJDC, I will continue to attack you. See ya on 30th.

That's true. It did have nothing to do with RJDC. He told me the rumor I originally posted, and nothing more.

How did I attack RJDC again? Believe me, I'm a lot more sympathetic to your cause than a lot of people you know. And giving ALPA a "free ride"? You sure jump to a lot of conclusions.

See you on the 30th. Glad to hear you'll make it this time.

 

[701EV]

12 in ATL. 11 operational and 1 spare.

19 in SLC. 18 operational and 1 spare.

After that who knows.

701EV<<


Not so fast.. Dont forget about the 7 to be "based" in CVG. Which leaves 5 in ATL.
Obviously no ASA crew base in CVG, but the planes will be based there. Going to rotate crews through ATL, just like they did with the short stint on the ATRs.

Bailout,

That came from Mark Fischer last week in the OP4 class. He also stated that we might staff some of the SLC 70's out of ATL.

It appears that nobody in the GO has a clue about whats going to happen in the next couple of months. You would have also thought they would have shared the info about the new flying out of TPA. But that makes to much sense.

701EV

 

[FDJ2]

T-Gates,
The ASA and CMR pilots have scope protecting "ASA and CMR" flying. That is all our bargaining agent says we own. Our bargaining agent says that all DCI flying belongs to Delta pilots. How would you have us "scope" something that our own bargaing agent says doesn't belong to us in the first place? The RJDC agrees that scope is important.

Inclusive, if you had a different bargaining agent would any of that been different. No. Your argument, that somehow the fact that the Delta pilots are ALPA and you are ALPA is the cause of your problems is rediculous, since regardless of who you had as your agent and who we use as ours wouldn't have made any difference.

 

[InclusiveScope]

Inclusive, if you had a different bargaining agent would any of that been different. No. Your argument, that somehow the fact that the Delta pilots are ALPA and you are ALPA is the cause of your problems is rediculous, since regardless of who you had as your agent and who we use as ours wouldn't have made any difference.

Your right, the problem would be the same if we had a different bargaining agent. The only difference is that we can and we are making a DFR issue out of it. The problem is the same at Eagle and American. The Eagle pilots however cannot claim DFR with APA as APA does not represent the Eagle pilots. In fact, my understanding is that APA did not want to represent the Eagle pilots for this very reason. Maybe ALPA should have thought this through a little better, don't you think...?????

 

[~~~^~~~]

Maybe ALPA should have thought this through a little better, don't you think.....

Well they did not and now they have to deal with the consequences of being "the" pilots' union while also trying to deny 15/32cnds of their members any rights to participate in the negotiation of their wages and working conditions.

As for the Delta pilots, they have made their bed. They had better get used to sleeping in it. My family survived three bankruptcies, believe me, in the words of the Top Gun Squadron leader - "your ego is writing checks your skills can't cash."

And General - no the RJDC crowd has never, not ever, published one word about flying mainline equipment. If I'm lying find it and post it. Otherwise you are just another of the thoughtless crowd parroting the crap created by folks like Mike Pinho.

We just want your MEC to leave us alone and allow us to bargain collectively with our employer, just like every other worker in the United States has the right to do under law. But it becomes increasingly irrelevant. Delta is on its way to assuming room temp.

~~~^~~~

 

[FDJ2]

Your right, the problem would be the same if we had a different bargaining agent.

Which leads to the "but for" argument. You need to prove that "but for" the fact that we both have ALPA on our property as a bargaining agent, you would not have suffered these alledged damages. As you have stated, it wouldn't have mattered whether or not ALPA was the bargaining agent, your problem would still be the same. This is just one more argument in ALPA's defense, besides the obvious ones, such as ALPA didn't act in a manner that is so outside the range of reasonableness as to be irrational, ALPA is given great judicial deference in the interpretation of its own by-laws, ALPA bargaining units, in accordance with both the by-laws and administrative manual, are given a great deal of autonomy in selecting their own individual negotiating goals, no damages have occurred since the CMR pilots have experience 85% growth since their acquisition and now have an industry leading regional contract, unions can place the competing interests of one group above another, etc.

 

[rgd]

DFW has only been a profitable hub in 3 of the last 12 years. Delta made the large expansion with DCI to try to save DFW in a last ditch effort. It has lost a total of over 900 million in those 12 years. Straight out of Skip's mouth last Wed. at about 10 a.m in the B.T.M.T. room in DFW. How is that the rj's fault?

 

[FDJ2]

We just want your MEC to leave us alone and allow us to bargain collectively with our employer, just like every other worker in the United States has the right to do under law.

~~~^~~~

Of course your employer is either ASA or CMR. Delta just happens to own the equity stake in your employer. A well accepted practice in corporate structures.

 

[FlyComAirJets]

It's not a two way street.

While the General frequently accuses those who support the RJDC as willing to fly mainline DAL at a tiny fraction of their current book rate (re: his last post), he sees nothing wrong in DAL pilots flying RJs at a fraction of DCI rates ala Jets4Jobs/Mid Atlantic-style.

Hey, it's a free country and he can be as much a hypocrite as he pleases. My beef isn't with him.

As for the union that has willingly payroll deducted dues from me, including three assessments, over that past two decades plus -- now therein lies the rub.

 

[General Lee]

Fins,


Can you say for a fact that the RJDC won't ask for anything larger than 70 seaters? I have a feeling they will, since the future growth now seems to be in the 100 seat market. We shall see.......



Flycomairjets,

I don't have a beef with you either (unless you are that Lawson character....) As far as the MDA style 70 seaters, if those aircraft REPLACED mainline aircraft, then I would think that OUR GUYS would have first pick on THOSE particular aircraft. I have never said anything about taking your current aircraft. I don't want anyone to lose a job, but I do want those who have (our furloughs) to get back into a cockpit. That seems fair.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[~~~^~~~]

Fins,


Can you say for a fact that the RJDC won't ask for anything larger than 70 seaters? I have a feeling they will, since the future growth now seems to be in the 100 seat market. We shall see.......

General Lee

General:

In your Contract 96, your MEC negotiated 100 seat flying to non-seniority list airlines. The fact of the matter is that the RJDC litigation was filed in time to dispute the changes in CY96 to CY2K scope language.

So no, the RJDC is not after "mainline" equipment. The problem is that your MEC feels that they can keep changing the definition of mainline, even after other ALPA members hold the jobs.

Some LEC's at Delta want to define mainline at 50 seats. So just what do you expect us to do? But then again, what does it matter. Nobody is going to lend Delta money for 100 seat aircraft. Would you?

~~~^~~~

 

[asarjfo]

>>12 in ATL. 11 operational and 1 spare.

19 in SLC. 18 operational and 1 spare.

After that who knows.

701EV<<


Not so fast.. Dont forget about the 7 to be "based" in CVG. Which leaves 5 in ATL.
Obviously no ASA crew base in CVG, but the planes will be based there. Going to rotate crews through ATL, just like they did with the short stint on the ATRs.

So out of the 61 flights ASA will operate out of CVG, 5 700's will do some of the flying? That does not make any sense, since Comair is still flying the 700 into ATL. Where did you get your information?

 

[FlyComAirJets]

FDJ2,

Excellent points, there is indeed a high standard of proof necessary to prevail in a duty of fair representation case. Fortunately the good pilots of DAL won't be populating the jury on this case. To paraphrase the good doctor, those who benefit from an injustice are the last the decry an injustice.

That the RJ fleet has grown over the last few years has been despite flawed scope, not because of it or are you saying that the DAL PWA promotes RJ growth?


Gee Lee,

The answer lies in the very name, the Regional Jet Defense Coalition. That is why you never have and never will see the RJDC advocate taking your seats. But as you just laid out in YOUR LAST POST, you support doing to us the very thing you supposedly detest! Is that what you want us to use, the "REPLACED" Test? There is an intersection of interests looming and I think it would be much better if we work together for a common, beneficial solution. You really don't want us in oppostion, do you?