Combining the seniority lists

[Draginass]

I don't think management will give up the bargaining leverage they have gained by being able to play us against one another. My ideas on how to do it don't account for that part of the problem.

Well, Surplus, thank you, . . . . . . at last. A small problem, though, huh.

Result, you are now fighting both management and your fellow pilots at the regionals.

Funny, I'm not fighting anyone, and certainly not AE ALPA. In point of fact, our two unions have a pretty good relationship. I think the vast majority of AE pilots recognize the importance of scope, as witnessed by the outsourcing grievance they are currently in.

You will wind up with the wide body and transcontinental flying. We will get the rest.

Why limit yourself to domestic flying? Why not take it all? If compensation at mailine is too high and scope is "illegal" (haven't seen anybody arrested for it yet), then why would international and wide-body flying be immune from transfer? If scope is struck down, then why not all code-share including domestic code share? That would give management the necessary flexibility to shift resources around to better meet customer demand. Why should AMR not have the flexibility to contract out to UAL or AWA, or even allow cabotage with off-shore carriers like Ryanair, for that matter?

Let's take a poll. How many of you F/Os at the regionals would be willing to give up your Saab and fly a wide-body internationally out of New York for $60 an hour and a 401k? Of course, you'll have to do it for that for the rest of your career, or until someone else is willing to do it for less.


As is usual in today's America, what happens in the future depends upon the unpredictability of a caprious court system. If the courts delcare that scope provisions, rightfully negotiated in good faith between a labor group and management, are invalid, then the unions will be emasculated into pointlessness. If that happens it won't matter if you're mainline, COMAIR, or any other carrier. If the companies can outsource your jobs at will, there are always pilots that would be glad to work for less and the profession will adjust to a compensation rate based upon the lowest common demoninator. The damage to the prestigue and lucrativeness of the profession would be substancial.

I have more faith in the system than to anticipate the above scenario, however. Fortunately, those in the profession who would relish in bringing down the bar, are few. They, however, have strong allies in the ATA and airline managements, who see a chink in the armour of unionism and surely will pursue it with enthusiam.

We shall see. For those in the early and mid points in their careers, the stakes are very high indeed.

 

[Clownpilot]

Re: TO: Clownpilot

>>That's an interesting perspective, but it is far from being historically accurate. Regional carriers are not at all "new". That is why we invented the term "commuter airline".>>

When did I ever say regional carriers were new????

>>If the mega carriers decide to spin off their wholly owned subsidiaries completely, you will begin to see mergers between the large regionals, which will become small majors in their own right. They will compete, not against the mainline carriers, but pilot group againsr pilot group for the flying. I assure management will not object to that. Management will be able to make "deals" with these new carriers that keep the money flowing where they want it. They will actually work together in a series of alliances that benefit both (coincidentally at the expense of labor).>>

LOL. Majors own their feeds so they can control the schedules and feed their mainline. Selling them wold eliminate that control. It's a hollow threat. Also, it removes their control of route planning, makes them susceptible to broken code shares, and gives the feed carrier an incredible amount of leverage by putting them in a position to start a bidding war for their services. Analysts who think the majors will sell their wholly owned subsidiary feeds are idiots. They'd be cutting their own throats.


>>The bad part is the impact that this will have on the piloting profession. The mega carriers of today will exit the narrow body flying little by little and gravitate towards the lower cost structure of the new "mini-major" carriers, which will be regional in name only. The pilot groups at the new carriers, having been shunned by the big boys of today, will form their own labor union and bid for the narrow body flying. They will win the bidding wars or the mainline pilots will have to lower their cost structure to match them in an effort to keep the flying. The outcome will be devastating financially to pilots of both groups.>>

Stop doing drugs. The FAA is allowed to test for that. Did you come up with this on an acid trip?



>>Privately, I think you should have to pay the price of your arrogance and stupidity. I don't want that to happen because I think it is not good for the profession as a whole. Yet I acknowledge that the more I listen to most of you, the less I care about what happens to you. You will lose your power to dictate what we do or don't do. In the final analysis YOU are the one's that will lose your $150/hr copilot pay rates. People like me will gain a huge pay raise even though you view it as slave labor. Laugh now if you please, but remember that "he who laughs last, laughs best".

If you continue to refuse to change, it's not my throat that I envision being cut, it is yours. You can feel free to stop talking about this whenever you choose. You may call it ridiculous as often as you please. YOU, will ultimately pay the price of your actions or inaction. You've been warned repeatedly that there are rocks in the shallows, yet you steam full speed ahead, blindly. "I'm a lighthouse. It's your call.">>

A regional pilots wet dream; "mainline must merge with us to protect themselves from management." What a joke. This is the last desperate grasp at straws of the pathetic regional pilot who can never climb out of the regional cellar. They wish doom and gloom on the Major pilots threatening disaster if we don't merge lists and align with their cause. The hysterical part is how transparent it all is. No mainline pilot believes your doomsday scenario and this pathetic attempt to get a job you couldn't get on your own by trying to scare the mainline pilots into giving into your fantasies is just plain pathetic. If you really believe your own drivel you're in bigger trouble than I thought you were. Go ahead, call me arrogant and tell me my arrogance will come back to haunt me. The fact is that I've studied this and your assertions are just plane unrealistic. If you want a real job apply for it. We're not gonna just hand it to you.

 

[E120ASA]

Great topic, but sorry, it will never happend. Out goes the lights.

 

[skydiverdriver]

Draginass,
I think you know that you make no sense, but someone may need to tell you anyway. Take all of mainline flying away, that's a good one. Were you laughing when you said that? I'm sure the rjdc is working for just that, so that Comair can take over all of Delta's flying and make it all ours. What is your point? Are you trying to make us look stupid by being stupid yourself? If you could explain to me why you are speaking this way, perhaps I could understand you and the rest of the sky-nazis. No, on second thought, don't bother. I think I know enough allready.

 

[surplus1]

Well, Surplus, thank you, . . . . . . at last. A small problem, though, huh.

You're most welcome. No, not a small problem. A big problem that we created and they are taking advantage of. We let it happen, we must fix it.

Funny, I'm not fighting anyone, and certainly not AE ALPA. In point of fact, our two unions have a pretty good relationship. I think the vast majority of AE pilots recognize the importance of scope, as witnessed by the outsourcing grievance they are currently in.

Well, that's very good news. A welcome change from your past practices. Pray tell me, what motivated your newely found recognition of the existence of AE? Any chance it's related to the fact you have folks on furlough? Probably not, my bad. Guess it's because you want to convince them how much you really care. Now I understand why you offer to take all their jets, of course without them. Sorry, I blew that again, you did promise to take what was "remaining" wasn't it? If you ever got to Phase III.

Tish tish, don't get upset now you're forgetting what I said. I'm not opposed to scope. It's Section 1 isn't it? And that's because it's the most important part of any contract. But, there is Scope and then there is the other kind of scope.

The AE pilots have a right to be concerned. The companies that they are worried about operate the same equipment and they are not a part of AMR. They are subcontractors.

Eagle is not a subcontractor. It is a component of AMR (just like you are). When you write scope to keep the flying of AMR for AMR pilots, you get 5 stars *****. When you write scope against your own company and fellow pilots you are misapplying the purpose and the intent of Scope.

I thought you had figured that out and that was why you made your 3-phase proposal, but I guess I was wrong. Oh well, that's the story of my life. The day my ship came in where was I? At the airport. Missed it.

Why limit yourself to domestic flying? Why not take it all? If compensation at mailine is too high and scope is "illegal" (haven't seen anybody arrested for it yet), then why would international and wide-body flying be immune from transfer?

Sorry, I was just trying to emulate your lead. It's really a 3-phase program for your benefit. I just told you about Phase I due to space limitations. I didn't have room to put the details in the summary. Don't worry, if there are any of you left when we get to Phase III, you'll be able to come over too.

Dragin, I can play your game, but it's pointless. Why don't we try to discuss the real issues and spare ourselves the barbs. Like I told you before, I've been around the pattern more than once. This can be a debate or we can make it a p*****g contest. Either way I can handle the flak. I'm not asking you to agree with me and I'm reading everything you write carefully without any preconceptions. Do the same and we can learn something from each other. There is really no need to be supercilious.

As is usual in today's America, what happens in the future depends upon the unpredictability of a caprious court system.

You're very right about that. One of the best examples I can think of is the rantings of the so-called judge that ruled against your union originally. When I read the full opinion, I couldn't believe my eyes. That is why the phrase justice system is such a misnomer.

If the courts delcare that scope provisions, rightfully negotiated in good faith between a labor group and management, are invalid, then the unions will be emasculated into pointlessness.

Your statement is accurate. However, that is NOT what our litigation is asking the courts to do. We are asking the court to vacte a particular scope provision precisely because it was negotiated in bad faith by a labor union that would not allow the affected party to participate in the process contrary to its own Constitution and ByLaws. That is substantially different from what you perceive.

While I cannot account for the capricious nature of the court system, we do not expect nor do we want the court to declare all Scope invalid. You may not like or agree with what we are doing, but we are not frivilous or stupid.

If you wish to debate the merits of the case you are welcome to do so. Before you begin the very least you should do is familiarize yourself with the complaint. Jumping to erroneous suppositions that have no basis in fact makes you appear as capricious as you accuse the courts of being.

If that happens it won't matter if you're mainline, COMAIR, or any other carrier. If the companies can outsource your jobs at will, there are always pilots that would be glad to work for less and the profession will adjust to a compensation rate based upon the lowest common demoninator. The damage to the prestigue and lucrativeness of the profession would be substancial.

You are quite right about all of that with perhaps one minor exception. I don't think the damage would be "substantial", I think it would be devastating.

Again, we do not ask nor do we want the courts to strike down Scope. We want the court to find that the union acted in bad faith and improperly negotiated the scope clause in question. Therefore, the clause should be vacated and a new Scope section renegotiated in the proper manner.

Should the court rule in our favor it will not strike down Scope or render it meaningless. It will actually enhance future Scope by ensuring that is in fact negotiated in good faith with the affected parties at the table, participating fully.

The theory is actually quite simple. You may negotiate on your own behalf whatever scope you choose to control the allocation of your work. You may NOT negotiate any scope that controls the allocation of my work. Further, you may not negotiate anything on my behalf without my consent. There is no rocket science in that.

Fortunately, those in the profession who would relish in bringing down the bar, are few.

If your intention is to infer that is my position or desire you have failed totally to comprehend anything that I have written. Nothing could be further from the truth.

My advocacy and the entire purpose of my effort is to preclude the occurence of precisely what you allege. That is exactly why I think it is so urgent that we find an equitable solution to the problem that has developed. Failure is not an option.

The worse case scenario of which I wrote is not something that I see as desirable. Nevertheless, it IS something that I see as probable if we fail or refuse to adress the current issues that divide us.

I am a diehard unionist with 24 years of active volunteer service in defense of the rights of my fellow pilots and my own, both in IFALPA and ALPA USA. The very last thing that I want to witness is the demise of my union or the failure of my union to accomplish its intended purpose, i.e., the fair and unbiased representation, promotion, protection and defense of every member's profession and rights.

Just as it is my sworn responsibility to intervene and attempt to prevent any member of my profession from actions that damage his own reputation or that of the profession, so also is it my responsibility to intervene and attempt to change the course of my union when I believe that its actions fall short of its responsibilities to the membership, be it only one member or all 60,000.

I am trying to do that to the best of my ability. The union to which you now belong came into existence because the union to which I belong failed the members of American Airlines. Your predecessors decision was to leave. My decision is to remain and fight for what is right from within. I think that is the preferable course of action. You are free to think differently if you so please.

I can tolerate your calling me names or ridiculing my views, but do not accuse me of being anti-union or against my profession. Them thar is fighting words.

We shall see. For those in the early and mid points in their careers, the stakes are very high indeed.

Yes, the stakes are high for all. Too high to ignore or treat with benign neglect. "We'll find a way or make it!"

Surplus1

 

[73GDog]

Surplus1,
You have way too much time on your hands!!

 

[SF3CAP]

Hey Clown Boy: Your military arrogance shines through in your last post. What a bunch of horsesh*t! You mean, we're not gonna get a major job "just handed to us" like you did, right?

 

[Clownpilot]

HA

LOL

The truth hurts.

Hey Clown Boy: Your military arrogance shines through in your last post. What a bunch of horsesh*t! You mean, we're not gonna get a major job "just handed to us" like you did, right?

 

[trigeek]

Surplus,
Sorry, your whole argument on our scope is illegal because DAL owns Comair and your scope is legal because we don't Trans States is lost on me.
That aside, IF you do win your lawsuit, I don't think ALPA representing both pilot groups next time around will be a problem. ALPA will either withdraw representation from Comair/ASA or Delta pilots will withdraw from ALPA. Not a threat, just a prediction. There are a lot of pilots who were writing you strike assessment checks that now wish they never had.
And just for the record, Leo spoke to a group of new Captains the other day. I'm sure its just "spin" but he said absotely not to the merging of companies or list. DCI would lose its cost advantage. I sure he said that just to make us feel better though

 

[skydiverdriver]

Trigeek,
You are probably correct, but you missed the point. The point is not for them to combine us, or do anything else that is under the discretion of Delta Airlines. The point is to treat us the same as they would any other AIRLINE. So, if the rjdc does win it's lawsuit, and our union starts to do what it promised us it would, then either Delta or it's regionals leave ALPA, then we have won. I don't understand why people don't get this point, but I keep trying. You make it sound like our suit is counterproductive if one of the parties leaves the union. Well, it wouldn't be much different from the current situation, would it?

The reason scope is incorrect for two airlines that are owned by the same company is because the ALPA bylaws say that those two airlines should be merged. Now, if we were merged, our combined scope would not limit one group against another. Does this help with your Trans-states question?

If you are still confused, and it is a difficult issue, please read all the recent posts by Surplus, and I think he has addressed your question in detail. Thanks for reading.