Combining the seniority lists

[surplus1]

Part II of II to FlyDeltaJets

(Continued)


Speculation as to specifics doesn't accomplish much. Suffice to say there is more than one way to deal with the problem and there is more than one viable solution. A single seniority list is NOT the only solution. As far away as 1995, formalized proposals on how to avoid the current conflict and what we might do to resolve the issues were in fact made to your leaders (of the day). All proposals were rejected without even a modicum of serious consideration. One of your former MEC Chairmen was even arrogant enough to demand an apology from my MEC Chairman because we asked for a meeting and pressured him when we were ignored. Needless to say he didn't get it.

Your leaders have maintained consistently the standard ALPA flow-through rhetoric at every opportunity. No matter how hard we tried to explain that we had no interest in that, they simply refused to acknowledge that we were NOT interested in ALPA's repeatedly failed flow through models. Instead, they consistently pretended that we were "rejecting out of hand" a flow through "offer" from them. The truth is the never made a flow-through offer and, THEY WERE NEVER IN A POSITION TO MAKE A FLOW THROUGH OFFER. That whole thing was nothing but a charade and they resented the fact that we could see through it with clarity. They still resent (at ALPA National) the fact that Comair wouldn't buy into that plan.

The rank and file line pilot at Delta doesn't really know anything about the details of the innumerable conversations, meetings, joint sessions, etc. There isn't enough space to list it all here and even if there were, this is NOT the proper venue.

The bottom line is, there have been proposals, and there have been ideas. There are still more ideas but nobody wants to talk about them. As long as it is not some stupid flow-through, we're willing to hold substantive talks anytime. I am not an official spokesperson. I hold no official position of any kind and I am not an official participant or member in the RJDC. What I write are my own opinions, but I do know that my MEC and the separate RJDC people, have always been open to constructive dialogue. None has ever been offered by the other side.

As long ago as during the EAL strike, I personally told the now famous Rick Dubinsky of UAL, that ALPA's continued pursuit of a flawed policy with respect to regional airlines would ultimately place the entire Association in jeopardy. I'm sure he would not remember because I was an insignificant regional pilot and he was Chairman of the United MEC. Nevertheless, I told him then and, I've told a lot of other important ALPA leaders since then. None of them listened. Well, here we are. I wonder what's next.

Of you FDJ, I make one personal request. Stop focusing on One List. It is only one of the possible solutions. Stop believing that one list is the only reason for the litigation. It is NOT. There is even more than one way to create a single list. There are ways to reach a solution without a single list. This is an unconventional problem and it will require a very different and NEW solution, not a rehash of the past.

ALPA has been a wonderful organization and has done more than anyone else to enhance and further the profession of Airline Pilot. We have weathered many a crisis and we can solve this problem too. However, we need to understand that his is a labor union now, not a private club for the privileged. We need leadership! A statesman to replace the politician. It will take more than a highly paid bureaucracy and a few highly paid politicians, to fix this problem. The real problem is not just between Delta, Comair and ASA. It is industry wide and growing. We need to get off our butts, roll up our sleeves and put our heads together for however long it takes to come up with the answers. Regrettably, we haven't even begun. At this rate, the malignancy will overcome us.

I don't think that we can achieve it. I would like for you to change my mind.

I think "the difficult we do immediately, the impossible takes a little longer." Unfortunately, I can't change your mind. Only you can do that.

PS. Please read my post to Ifly4food. (Why can't we all get along thread)

 

[publisher]

Delta/Comair

The point made about a total separation would be valid. That is not what I am talking about.

The symbiotic relationship would still exist and Delta shareholders would still be a beneficiary of the spin off and on going profits.

What is going on with Freedom and Mesa is a good example regardless of the personalities or companies and what you think.

Here is a regional that flies for two separate majors, USAir and Am West. You have both of them giving him rules to follow that conflict with each other and the regionals financial future.

You have to remember that XX regional not only serves as a market penetrator but also market maintainer, frequency provider, and point ot point competitor.

Comair, on its own, would be considered a major carrier if separated tomorrow. It needs to maintain its cost advantage for those situations where it competes on point to point business and also to reduce the cost to mainline to enter a market segment. You could merge ACA and ASA and Comair and have a tremendous airline that may well be more profitable than the mainline carrier. Their power could wipe out all the other regionals.

My point here is that be wrapping yourself up in one issue, you are not looking at the big picture. Flow through and back has not worked worth a **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**, one list is not going to work, both because they put artificial contraints to good business practice.

Delta mainline pilots are never going to hang their deal on this type of thing and why should they. The companies are not going to even discuss it. APA is trying to do it another way and found it was not a topic to even discuss. American would not sacrifice the long term implications for the short term benefits. By the time USAir gets an agreement on small jets, they will have lost a significant market share.

Bottom line, the fat lady is not singing on this subject, she has dressed and left the building.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Surplus,

This has been purely an academic excercise. All of your points are accurate, but I think you missed the point of my post. I understand your assertion that you only want ALPA to follow its integration policy. I also understand that onelist is not the only answer. My post was just idle curiousity about what steps ALPA would have to take if the PID was granted. It seems a reasonable question. Would anything really change if the PID was granted? How?

Also, you asked what we were scared of regarding a seniority integration. I believe that the only appropriate integration is a staple. I know that you disagree. I am simply giving you the mindset of the Delta pilots. Right or wrong, they will not support any idea that puts their seniority in the hands of an arbitrator. I am not defending this postition, I am merely reporting the reality.

Again, many people have posted over and over again the need for the PID and a seniority integration. It sounds like a good idea to me, I just want to see if it is a practical one. So far I am not convinced.

 

[rjcap]

FDJ,

Also, you asked what we were scared of regarding a seniority integration. I believe that the only appropriate integration is a staple. I know that you disagree. I am simply giving you the mindset of the Delta pilots. Right or wrong, they will not support any idea that puts their seniority in the hands of an arbitrator.

Is it really that important that the Delta pilots either endorse or support the bylaws of ALPA ? Do they have that choice ?

Do you and I have the authority to pick and choose the rules and regulations we fly under ?

This problem will most likely be resolved by a judge throught his interpretation of the ALPA bylaws.

As far as the RJ's go, the marketplace has wholeheartedly embraced the regional jet. I might add, without the support or endorsement of the Delta pilots !

 

[Draginass]

That is also an assumption. If the solution were properly structured, in a way that management could accept, there would be no real need for concessions at all. Difficult to do; you bet. Impossible; not at all. No one has tried so we don't know. You're just guessing.

Surplus -
Are you really serious that there would be no need for concessions by mainline???

No more glittering generalities . . . put up or shut up . . . .

1. EXACTLY, how could it be "properly" structured (and acceptable to management) so no concessions were necessary by anybody??

And as I've said several times, the APA offered combining AA and AE. AMR won't even discuss it. I doubt Delta will either. If it could be done with no cost, it would have been done ALREADY.

You have definate opinions on what needs to be done without a clue on how to do them.

Quit whining about ALPA, and do something useful like stop perpetuating sub par compensation and insist your MEC and membership (who decides the contract you ultimately sign, NOT ALPA NATIONAL) gets a contract that makes operating separate companies irrrelevant. As long as YOU are willing to work for a for sub par compensation and conditions, that's what YOU will get.

This is the real world, not Fantasy Island.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

FDJ,



Is it really that important that the Delta pilots either endorse or support the bylaws of ALPA ? Do they have that choice ?

Do you and I have the authority to pick and choose the rules and regulations we fly under ?

This problem will most likely be resolved by a judge throught his interpretation of the ALPA bylaws.

As far as the RJ's go, the marketplace has wholeheartedly embraced the regional jet. I might add, without the support or endorsement of the Delta pilots !

RJ,

A few points:

1. You are correct. The support of the DAL pilots should not matter for the PID being granted. The support of the DAL pilots is absolutely essential (my opinion) if the purpose of the PID (seniority integration) is to be successful.

2. Not sure what your second question means.

3. I agree that a judge MIGHT decide the the bylaws were not followed. HOWEVER, he does not have the power to force DAL to merge us. The point of my question was how we could do that. There still has not been an answer.

4. The rj has been very successful. It is not up to the Delta pilots to support or endorse them. Management can operate as many as they want. We don't have a say. All we can do is specify who flies them once DCI hits the contractually negotiated block hour limits. But that is a topic for a different thread.

I will ask again...Let's assume the PID was granted. Now what do we do? If people think that we have the power to merge the lists, than please demonstate that. If we don't have the power to merge the lists, than the fact that the PID was denied is not really relevant. The fact is, I kind of think that we would still be in the same position even it the PID was granted.

 

[Timebuilder]

>3. I agree that a judge MIGHT decide the the bylaws were not followed. HOWEVER, he does not have the power to force DAL to merge us. The point of my question was how we could do that. There still has not been an answer.

Can I raise my hand here? Suppose a judge DID find that the bylaws were not followed? How would he find a legal remedy for that? Remember, a finding is usually followed by a ruling which dictates a remedy. Could he find precedent (or case law) that would force Delta and the union to re-open negotiations based on his finding of fact, or woould it simply mean 'oops, somebody messed up here, try to do better next time..'?

 

[skydiverdriver]

FDJ,
I think I have the essense of your question understood, and it's the same question I've been asking. I think the easy answer is, why not let it happen? I'm not a lawyer, or an expert on ALPA's bylaws, but I think they have not been followed in this case. If ALPA agreed to follow their own rules, and work on the PID, I'm sure they would come up with some way to try to implement it. Even if they couldn't, just the fact that they tried would make a lot of us feel better. You see, we don't want ALPA to do anything illegal, or impossible, we just want them to do what they promised us when we joined them. Just as they have for you.

So, again I ask, if you don't think it will ever happen without Delta or even you guys wanting it, why are you so afraid to talk about it (in an official capacity, not referring to us talking like this)?

Why not tell ALPA that you want them to follow their own rules, and let us have our PID. If nothing will come of it, why is it so scary? As far as actually how do we TRY to get the company to merge, I think that should be left up to the lawyers and politicians at ALPA. It's not my field, but they should be doing it, because it's the right and legal thing to do.

 

[rjcap]

FDJ,

2. Not sure what your second question means.

The comment was in reference to point #1. With laws and rules in place we do not have the choice of those that we are going to abide by and those we choose to ignore.

I will ask again...Let's assume the PID was granted. Now what do we do? If people think that we have the power to merge the lists, than please demonstate that. If we don't have the power to merge the lists, than the fact that the PID was denied is not really relevant. The fact is, I kind of think that we would still be in the same position even it the PID was granted.

I have absolutely zero idea. That will be up to the judge and the attorneys.

I would like to stress one point. I am not that interested in the one list issue as I am in the scope issue. I can fully understand the resisitence to merging or stapling lists. I will not tolerate ALPA violating its fiduciary duty to DCI by negotiating artificial restrictions that benefit mainline only. This is my personal opinion only.

as usual

good luck

 

[surplus1]

Surplus,

This has been purely an academic excercise. All of your points are accurate, but I think you missed the point of my post. I understand your assertion that you only want ALPA to follow its integration policy. I also understand that onelist is not the only answer. My post was just idle curiousity about what steps ALPA would have to take if the PID was granted. It seems a reasonable question. Would anything really change if the PID was granted? How?

I guess I'll have to accept that your post was "purely academic" and your questions just "idle curiousity but knowing how you write and the research that you do, it is hard to believe that.

Yes, a great many things would have changed if the PID had been granted, particularly if it had been granted with the support of the DMEC. What steps would the ALPA have had to take? No more than those outlined in the merger policy. Check it out. Read the merger policy and see for yourself what it says the Association is required to do when it believes a merger should take place but the Company does not. Pretty benign.

Our merger committees would have met; we would have had some debate; we (CMR) would have made our intentions clear; we would have reached a fair agreement on what and integrated list should look like, what fences might be required, other protocols and how we would proceed, etc..

I firmly believe an agreement acceptable to Delta pilots could and would have been achieved outside of the arbitration process. I cannot tell you exactly how I know this or why I am so confident in saying it, but I assure you I am not pulling your chain, I mean it. Neither the Comair leadership or the Comair pilot group is nearly as naïve or greedy as many seem to think. We have a pretty good handle on what is doable and what is not. We also have a philosophy that is somewhat unique in ALPA. We are unwilling to benefit ourselves at the expense of others. I know that's incredible, but only because it is so foreign to our history. Sadly, we have been shouting brotherhood while exploiting each other for much of our existence.

After our DAL/CMR agreement (which from the Comair perspective would have included ASA from day one), ALPA would have proceeded to try to convince the Company. The strategy of how to do that would not have come about in a vacuum I assure you. It would have been determined jointly in advance. That means it would have been a real effort, not tokenism. However, it would NOT have been a suicidal effort for anyone.

Even if the effort ultimately failed, there would today be no resentment on our part of the National hierarchy; no disunity between our pilot groups; we would have been able to achieve a joint agreement on the Scope issues; both could have achieved more in collective bargaining; we probably would not have had to strike; their would never have been and RJDC and there would have been no lawsuit and finally, ASA might have been able to avoid a bargaining cycle while losing nothing. IMO, that's a real good score card.

Call it my dream world if you wish. I know what our positions would have been. The only obstacle(s) to a truly successful outcome of the process (excluding the Company's acceptance) was the agenda of ALPA and the intransigence of the Delta MEC. Sadly, it is my personal opinion that those two obstacles are alive and well today. Unfortunately for all of us, the realities of ALPA politics today do not justify the nobility of the ALPA Mission Statement.

Also, you asked what we were scared of regarding a seniority integration. I believe that the only appropriate integration is a staple. I know that you disagree. I am simply giving you the mindset of the Delta pilots. Right or wrong, they will not support any idea that puts their seniority in the hands of an arbitrator. I am not defending this postition, I am merely reporting the reality.

I understand and I believe you. Unfortunately things are so far apart that we can't even agree (as a group) on the meaning of the term "integration". By Delta pilots it has been mentally defined as Date of Hire and no amount of discussion seems able to alter that mental myopia.

The Delta pilots' fear of arbitration appears to be harbored in a general unawareness of whom and what "regional pilots" really are and is not applied equally across the board. The idea of arbitration with the likes of a regional pilot group seems to be a major underlying factor that generates and is expressed as this inordinate fear (I base that on their writings). There is further evidence as well. Delta has merged lists before and more than once as you well know. To this day demeaning undertones and whispers regarding the NorthEast pilots can be heard from "RDs". To a lesser extent the same applies to Western people. The RD culture may be unknown to the novice but it is no secret to those that have been around. I maintain there is no logic associated with the fear of arbitration in our case. It stems from what I see as furtive prejudice and the fact that you did not have a leader (at the time) with the statesmanship or the political clout (internal to Delta) necessary to allay the unwarranted fear. Instead, your leader chose to fan the flames of this fear for political expediency.

Unfortunately, I must also tell you that from my perspective at least, the Delta pilots do not have a history of fair dealings in merger situations. What happened to the PAA pilots at the bottom of your list is not unknown to everyone. I will grant you that you have no monopoly on this. Most pilot groups have taken advantage of the underdog whenever they could in almost every merger on record. Little wonder that you fear arbitration. It could eliminate at least partially the tendency and willingness to repeat such practices. In this particular scenario however, if anyone had legitimate reason to fear anything it was we, not you.

Again, many people have posted over and over again the need for the PID and seniority integration. It sounds like a good idea to me, I just want to see if it is a practical one. So far I am not convinced.

You may have noted from other posts of mine that I do not personally favor the idea of one list. I do support the RJDC but I also know that is not their prime objective so there is no conflict. I support them because I believe that if the ALPA is to survive as we know it, it must make significant changes in its practices with respect to regional pilots. And, I oppose the type of Scope that is being used against wholly owned subsidiaries and regional jets. Nevertheless, I do not believe that a staple to the Delta list is in the best interest of Comair pilots as a whole.

An example of why is manifest in the current state of the industry. A furlough of 1700 Delta pilots would result in every single Comair pilot being unemployed if we were tacked to your list. The great difference in the numbers on our lists, the relative size of the carriers, makes it far to risky in my opinion. Just my personal opinion.

Is it practical? Yes, I think it is. Is it achievable? Between the pilot groups = yes. With the Company, probably not. Nevertheless, "it is better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all."