Combining the seniority lists

[surplus1]

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

Being no more than a naïve and inexperienced regional pilot, the answer is YES. Perhaps some small concessions but nothing earth shaking.

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??

Don't you work for American? That means you're the competition. Why would I want to reveal to you the details of a plan that might solve the problems for us? My brand name is Delta. One of the objectives of Delta is to beat the competition from AMR so I'd just as soon let you stew in your own problems while we get a head start.

Additionally you're not in ALPA and I'm not among those who think recruiting you is such a good idea. All the more reason to let you stew. In addition, we still represent (though poorly) Eagle. We need to take care of our own family first. After we've solved the problem, you all will follow on the ALPA coat tails the way you usually do.

OK, that wasn't nice so I take it all back. Sorry.

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.

Is that what you really think the APA offered? Wow, I'm more naïve than I thought I was. I hope it doesn't alarm you, but I happen to think that AMR was very justified in rejecting your proposal. Since I know one of the fellas that sits across from your folks at the bargaining table, I'd bet a dollar to a donut that he laughed out loud when he read that idea. Do you think that if ALPA made a similar proposal vis-à-vis Delta/Comair that my pilot group would rush to drink that poison pill the way some Eagle pilots did? I'll tell you my friend, you'd get awful blue in the face holding your breath and waiting for that to happen.

What the APA offered was nothing more than a scam that would allow you to transfer all the Eagle jets to yourselves to be flown by AA pilots at the expense of the Eagle pilots and your company. Did you really expect AMR to see this as a breakthrough solution for a problem that they don't have? The cost/benefit of that proposal in the eyes of management had to be HIGH and ZERO respectively.

If the AE pilots saw that as a one-list proposal then ALPA isn't doing a good job of representing them and, you've been feeding them more Kool-Aid than exists in all of ALPA combined (and it's no secret I'm real unhappy with ALPA). That deal is worse than the recent USAir J4J protocol by a long shot. "Combining AA and AE"? You gotta be kidding. When were you going to do the combining? Oh yeah, I get it. After nearly all of the Eagle pilots had been demoted with the rest on the streets, and you and the TWA guys were flying their jets, you would give the residue a position on the bottom of your list. How wonderful, considerate and kind of the APA. It's no wonder you have the nickname that you do. I'm all in favor of you getting your furloughed pilots recalled, but when the method is equivalent to stealing from another pilot group you can count on my opposition.

I'm sorry to be so blunt but when the privileged attempt to browbeat the already downtrodden it just grates my gall.
We may have our problems with Delta but they have never proposed or attempted anything nearly as profane and predatory as that.

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

You are certainly entitled to that opinion as well as the right to express it.

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.

I have and investment in ALPA and I pay for its services. That entitles me to whine about it all I want. In contrast you are not in ALPA so it should not be of any concern to you what I do in my own house. Don't think that a family squabble allows you to invade my house with impunity.

As for doing something about sub par compensation, I think I'm on pretty firm ground when I say that my pilot group, Comair, has invested more than any other regional airline in the country in that effort. We have done far more to raise the bar by our own bootstraps than you have. While we were not completely successful, I'm not at all ashamed of how we handled ourselves. I haven't forgotten that from your group the industry and the profession inherited the cancer of the B-Scale that still survives in some places. We defended our turf with sweat, blood and honor. While we did not win a complete victory, we did not turn tail and run under fire. Outnumbered by overwhelming odds and fighting on 3 fronts, we held the line, maintained our integrity and inflicted huge damage on the enemy and fought them all to a standstill. Our honor remains intact and the equal of any other. We may be small and less important in your eyes than you are to yourselves. You may outnumber us 10 to 1, and if you take us on you may well prevail but, I guarantee you'll know you've been in one h**l of a scrap before its over and you'll think twice about trying it again. You and your union sir, are hardly in a position to throw stones at my pilot group.

This is the real world, not Fantasy Island.

I agree completely with that. I've been playing in the real world of airline piloting a great deal longer than my erstwhile critic. I did like that TV program though. I hope my small dose of the real world in return for yours hasn't burst your bubble.

By the way, I would like to thank the American Pilots for their very generous contributions to our Family Fund during the Comair strike. From what I've been told it was far more than we received from any single ALPA carrier and nearly as much as all ALPA carriers combined. For that I am most grateful and appreciative.

Now that we're done throwing rocks at each other, I propose a truce and a return to the debate at hand.

Bottom line: There are several options and concepts available that I believe might satisfy the needs of management as well as the pilot groups on both sides of the line. They do not require the merger of the corporate entities and the cost of implementation is quite low. If adopted, they would allow management to operate an unlimited number of small jets without significant penalty to the mainline pilots or the regional pilots. They would resolve the disputes between the diverse pilot groups as well.

I honestly believe that posting any developed and real plan on this or any other board, would not be beneficial and might torpedo any chance, however remote, of its being accepted. Such things must unfortunately be discussed in private between the parties before they hit the front page. It's the same reason you don't publish publicly the details of your serious contract proposals in advance or while negotiators are at the table. I hope you understand that. I really can't say much more than that.

I hope you also understand there is nothing personal about what I say when I respond heatedly. I'm not attacking your person, just your ideas. I assume you are doing the same. This is business and it's tough. I'm no less "armed and ready to launch" than you seem to be. This situation is a mess and sometimes very trying.

Best regards

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Surplus,

Actually, my question was intended as an academic excercise. I am genuinely interested in whether or not the thing for which most people on this forum argue could ever be achieved. I found it interesting how many people think we should merge the lists, yet how few responded to my question of whether we could merge them. I don't think that we could. I would like to hear from those who differ.

A few other points before I turn in, in no particular order.

I think that you overempasize the sentiment that we (DALPA) think the you guys are after DOH. I don't think that the "mental myopia" is as severe as you think. I believe that most of the people with whom I spoke realize that DOH for DCI is impossible. We do not fear you getting DOH, despite what you believe. We do, however, fear you getting anything but a staple. Fair or not, the overwhelming majority of our pilots feel very stongly that no DCI pilot should be put above even a single Delta pilot. I know that you don't think that this is fair, and I don't expect to change your mind. Your seniority is just as important to you as mine is to me, so it is not worth debating. We won't ever agree. I just wanted to give you a more accurate picture of the mood and concerns of my pilot group.

Also, I fail to see how the PID would have prevented your strike, negated the rjdc, hastened a better scope clause, etc, if we were unable to convince management to merge the lists. You say the rjdc is not about the PID, than opine that if the PID had been granted, the rjdc would never have sued. Furthermore, I find it ironic that you do not support onelist, but believe so strongly in the benefits of the PID. I am not accusing you of inconsistancy, as your ideas are rarely so. I am simply trying to understand your perspective.

You mention that your pilot group has more to fear than we regarding the integration of the lists. You even mention that you don't think that it is worth the risk. Then why are you so upset that the PID wasn't granted? Even if the process was unfair, I would think that you would be relieved at the outcome.

Here is my point (again). I don't believe that it will ever be possible to merge the lists if Delta doesn't want to. I also believe that the Delta pilots will never lend their support without a guarantee of a staple. You are all free to disagree.

I am simply (and innocently, Surplus!) curious how people who want onelist propose that we get it. Nothing any of us say here means a hill of beans, and normally pilots are pretty verbose when asked for ideas and opinions, yet no one seems to have a practical strategy.

SDD,

If you read this, congrats. I imagine most people have stopped reading by now!

You ask about the bylaws and the denial of the PID. I must admit that I don't really have an opinion on whether or not ALPA was justified in denying the PID. You will not be able to find a post from me ever arguing that the PID should have been denied. As a matter of fact, I have publically supported your right to sue to have a judge review the bylaws and ensure that they have been followed. I even offered to contribute to the rjdc if they dropped the monetary damages and attack on our scope.

In short, I have no objection to a PID. However, I do think that it is pointless. I think those who are up in arms over the PID are getting high blood pressure for nothing. I firmly believe that even if it had been granted, we still would be in the same boat, because I don't think we could ever convince management to merge the lists.

I am, however, willing to listen if you have any ideas to prove me wrong.

 

[surplus1]

Part I of II

TO: FlyDeltaJets,

OK, I accept the academic interest. You can learn a lot with that approach while avoiding some of the controversy.

With respect to contractual issues and labor union politics, when you're dealing with line pilots it is not really unusual for them to know what they want or would like. At the same time, it is quite normal for pilots to have no idea about what is entailed in fulfilling their wants and likes or how to achieve those things. That is why most pilots make lousy negotiators and poor representatives.

The planning, the doing, the details and the achieving are all left to "the union" and few ever realize independently, without a lot of spoon feeding, just who "the union" really is. Pilots want answers and are not in the business of providing solution. That is why so few participate actively in union affairs or run for union office. It is only when anticipating a higher pay rate in the new contract or when ready to complain intensely about something "the union" (meaning their elected reps) didn't do, that they come forth.

If you talk too much or too long about anything except airplanes, a pilot's span of attention wanes. Write more than 3 sentences in the same paragraph and they stop reading. That's the norm. So, when a pilot tells me that he has an academic interest in a political issue, my first reaction is: Oh really, whatever you say, but what do you really want? Sorry I didn't recognize you were a kindred spirit with a genuine academic interest. You should become a representative (if you aren't already).

Right now the Scope issue is hot. Still, I wonder how many Delta line pilots you actually believe have read every word and all 16 pages of the Scope Section in your contract. If they have, how many do you think really understand what it means in detail? In other words FDJ, you should not be too surprised that you are not getting detailed how to(s) in reply to your queries.

Since you are a Delta pilot you should have a better handle on what the line pilot thinks at Delta than I do. Maybe I am overemphasizing the "mental myopia". I admit that most of my contact with Delta pilots has been with those that are active in the union in one way or another. When it comes to those folks, I'll stand by my assessment.

I understand what you say about the fear of even one DCI pilot being put above a single Delta pilot. I'm not really worried about what is "fair". Fair, has never been a factor in mergers or seniority integration and everything is "fair" in love and war. My interest in this particular issue is somewhat academic itself.

I do not understand why your group resents the idea of "one DCI pilot being put above a single Delta pilot". However, I have very strong opinions about how I think most Delta pilots feel and what they think, that are based on exposure to a wide variety of your leaders and what they have said and done over an extended period. (I'll be boring you with a series of references and allegations, so hang on to your hat.) I have also read a lot of what Delta pilots have written on the ALPA forum, the AOL boards and others. There is a vast difference between, how, what and why. Frankly and in general, I find your groups attitude toward my group unwarranted and offensive. In spite of my best efforts to ignore it, the truth is I resent it. As you read on you'll notice. I don't think my feelings are misplaced and I know that many regional pilots share them, not just in my particular group. Personally, I didn't know what prejudice and bigotry felt like until I became a "regional" airline pilot in ALPA. Now I understand fully why other victims fight it so hard. But that's another subject. I won't deny that it influences my opinions on matters like these.

If my airline had been operating lets say 10 old DC9-10s prior to its being purchased by Delta, Inc., your own contract would have mandated a merger. The seniority integration would have been determined by ALPA merger policy. It would have been subject to arbitration if you could not agree. It could have resulted in many Comair pilots being put above many Delta pilots. My question is this: why would that be acceptable to Delta pilots, yet it is unacceptable for any DCI pilot to be put above a single Delta pilot? In my mind, the only reason I can think of is that you folks are bigoted and prejudiced against DCI pilots or all regional pilots. I don't understand what you think is so patently inferior about our people when compared to your people. To me, your whole attitude is absurd in the extreme.

I am not saying that I think DCI pilots (any of them) should be put above Delta pilots in a merger. We did not ask for that in the PID or elsewhere. I just don't understand your thinking. As Mr. Spock would say, "it is not logical". I once asked one of your MEC leaders what he would have done re the PID if Delta had purchased Midway instead of Comair. You know what his answer was? "We would merge with the 737 pilots, but not one dam* RJ pilot." (I think Midway had about 3 or 4 73's at the time and maybe 20 RJs. A nothing airline compared to Comair.) Remember that this is not from some new hire Delta pilot. It was from one of your elected leaders. Now if that doesn't demonstrate bigotry and the mental myopia of which I spoke, then you tell me what it means. Maybe I'm just too sensitive?

It is not your desire to protect your seniority that upsets most Comair pilots. That is normal. It's the negative and bigoted attitudes that you seem to continuously manifest towards us. You act as though you think we are your children who should speak when spoken to and do as we're told. This type of treatment is not limited to Delta pilots; it is a way of life in ALPA political circles as well. That's plain old B*** S***. A great many of the "mainline pilots" seem to think we should ride in the back of the bus, get up when you want to sit down, eat at separate counters and p in different bathrooms. Does it really surprise you that we don't share that view? The saddest part of all that is that similar attitudes towards regional pilots prevail in most major airline leadership groups and permeate the hallowed halls of ALPA. If the rank and file reflects some of that, I'm hardly surprised.

For the record, I want to make it clear that none of this bigotry makes me feel inferior in any way, but it does make me angry.

I know a lot of you appear to think that we owe our existence to your largess (God knows you've said it enough). It may be true in some regional airlines but, when it comes to Comair, that is just one more figment of your rather vivid imaginations. My company may be a subsidiary of your company on paper, but the fact is that right now your paycheck is being subsidized in part by the profits that my company generates consistently while your company is losing money. Before you bought us we paid you for every single service that Delta provided to us and you paid for the services that we provided to you. Your company "gave" us nothing. Since you bought us, our profits are buried in your accounting system and partially subsidize your unprofitable operations.

We understand that you don't want us on your list and that's ok. You should understand that we don't want to subsidize your "A-fund" with our profits either. Maybe we can't keep the company from doing away with our airplanes (just like you can't keep them from doing away with yours) but we will dam** sure fight to keep you from taking them or reducing their number to satisfy your own greed. You see FDJ, there are many of us who see you in the same light and with the same lenses that you see us.

The mess we're in as pilot groups has been created by Delta's decision to force the sale of our airline to you, plus ALPA's and your decision to treat us like dirt. Most of us did not want your company to acquire our company at all and consider it to be far less than a blessing. We were not all thirsting to be on your seniority list pre acquisition and we really aren't now; we wanted to be left alone. Perhaps we could not have made it without our Company-to-Company contractual relationship, but most of us wanted to try. Those of us that chose to leave were always free to do so. As far as whether you like us or not, many of us think you can stuff those attitudes where the sun doesn't shine. As far as ALPA National is concerned, we pay them to represent our interests and to secure and defend our assets from attack by you or anyone else. They haven't done it and that's why they're being sued.

Since neither your pilots nor our pilots had anything to do with the shotgun marriage and can't reverse it, the best thing to do now is work together as a single pilot group. In other words we both became unwilling parties to a mixed marriage. Arguing about the mix is no longer practical or beneficial to either of us. On the contrary it will hurt us both. Therefore, although reluctant, we need to set the animosity aside, make peace with each other and learn how to live together. So far we've done a lousy job of it. That is why I favored the PID. It was an opportunity to break the ice and make things better for everyone.

Please continue to Part II

 

[surplus1]

Part II of II

TO: FlyDeltaJets (Continued)

Also, I fail to see how the PID would have prevented your strike, negated the rjdc, hastened a better scope clause, etc, if we were unable to convince management to merge the lists. You say the rjdc is not about the PID, than opine that if the PID had been granted, the rjdc would never have sued. Furthermore, I find it ironic that you do not support onelist, but believe so strongly in the benefits of the PID. I am not accusing you of inconsistancy, as your ideas are rarely so. I am simply trying to understand your perspective.

I honestly appreciate your effort to understand my perspective. I'm trying hard to communicate it, but I'm obviously not doing a good job. Let me try again. I'll take it from the top of the paragraph, point by point.

A) It may have prevented the need for a strike due to the vastly increased leverage we would have had if we were on the same side. The company was fully aware of the divisions between the pilot groups and our differences with ALPA. That gave the company reason to believe that it could easily win a strike so, instead of cutting a deal, they decided to force a strike. They got the analysis of our union relationships and Delta pilot to Comair pilot relations very accurately. They grossly underestimated the Comair pilot's resolve. They thought it would end in a week with our heads between our tails. Instead, it cost them 500 million dollars and it nearly cost us our airline. I believe it is unlikely that would have happened had the Delta pilots, the Comair pilots and ALPA, all been on the same side.

B) Had the PID been granted, the RJDC would not have the evidence necessary to support a major component of its DFR allegations. The suit would never have been filed.

C) If the PID had been granted without opposition from the DMEC, both MEC's would have been on the same frequency and communicating with each other openly. Ideas about the type of scope required would have been jointly agreed and allocation of work issues settled. Predatory scope would not exist. (RJDC would have lost that evidence. No suit would have been filed.)

D) If the PID had been granted and merger policy followed by ALPA, the inability of the union or the pilot groups, severally and collectively, to convince management to accept integrated seniority would be seen in the same light as the inability to achieve a contractual goal during negotiations. End of problem. No RJDC, no lawsuit.

Instead, we have a labor union refusing to represent a group of its members. A labor union supporting one group of members at the expense of another. A labor union sanctioning the effort of some of its members to take from another group of its members and, thereby, acting in a discriminatory manner. Actively helping one group at the expense of the other. The PID is an internal ALPA political process that represents the implementation of merger policy. In this case, activation of the policy and all the unity and other good things that would have followed that, are far more important than the Company's acceptance of a single seniority list or its merger of the corporations. The Company's failure to approve the merger would have given us all, ALPA/DAL pilots/CMR pilots/ASA pilots, a solid and unified force with which to fight management and prevail. In my opinion, the actual integration of the lists is of far less value. We might have lost the battle of forcing the Company to accept, but we would have won the war in the process of trying.

Put another way, why do you think we want one list? Is it because we want to "grab your seniority"? H*** no! What we want is a single group of pilots unified and working together as one against a powerful and determined management that would do us all in if it could. The other benefits are peripheral; the least important of which is a number on your physical list. Try to think out of the box. This has become a disaster because you people are thinking as individuals. Self- interest and ME seem to be the key components of your thought processes. Put another way, there are 50 states in the Union, but there is only ONE USA. What we wanted was 2 states in the same union. ASA/CMR physically merged, but working in complete harmony with DAL. The Delta System! Instead we have all 3 of us fighting among ourselves, while management takes us to the cleaners. No less than a masterpiece of incompetence. I'm sure the Executive Council thinks its decision was a stroke of political power and genius. I think it was a shortsighted and monumental political blunder. A great opportunity that very well may have been lost forever.

You mention that your pilot group has more to fear than we regarding the integration of the lists. You even mention that you don't think that it is worth the risk. Then why are you so upset that the PID wasn't granted? Even if the process was unfair, I would think that you would be relieved at the outcome.

Please read the above again. If you understand what I said there your questions have been answered.

Let me try to explain what you see as somewhat of an inconsistency is saying I don't support one list, yet I favor the PID. I think the problem comes from this. What I do not support is the conventional idea of what "one list" means. I believe there are different and better ways to achieve the equivalent benefits of a conventional single seniority list, without out the down sides for any of the parties. My idea of what one list means is not the same as your idea of what one list means. Your idea is the prevalent one in the industry so I have to say I oppose it. I gave my reasons in the previous posts. Hope that helps.

I am simply (and innocently, Surplus!) curious how people who want onelist propose that we get it. Nothing any of us say here means a hill of beans, and normally pilots are pretty verbose when asked for ideas and opinions, yet no one seems to have a practical strategy.

First of all my arguments apply to the Delta System. Others systems are different and other pilot groups may have different ideas. So I'm not necessarily talking about them although they could emulate if they see fit. That being said, FDJ don't you recognize that when you take the position that the Company will never agree to what you want you have authored your own defeat? Does the company own the seniority list? I don't think they do, but you seem quite willing to give it to them lock, stock and barrel without so much as protest. That's a very risky position whether we get together or not.

There IS a practical strategy of how to accomplish the objective. There is more than one way. I think I know at least 3 different possible ways to make it happen. It does not have to cost the company or you or me any great sum of money or any major concession. I simply can't outline those concepts on a public bulletin board. It would give the enemies all the plans and that is not bright. One of the big problems seems to be that when anyone hears the phrase "one list" they instantly revert to a conventional corporate merger. This is a very unconventional situation and it will require innovative and unconventional solutions. That's as much as I can say.

That does not mean it's a cake walk for it isn't, but right now considering the level of misunderstanding and the lack of trust between the pilot groups, what the Company thinks at this point is truly irrelevant. We need to get our own house in order. When that's done, we can worry about what the Company thinks. Meanwhile, don't give the Company ownership of the seniority list so readily, easily and willingly. Does that help any or is it all still mud?

PS. As long as this is, I'm quite sure we've lost 80% of the gallery. That's what happens when two weird pilots with academic interests get to talking in public.

 

[Draginass]

Surplus - Don't want to reveal your secret weapon? Maybe it's a scheme whereby there are two classes of compensation and work rules with a guaranteed flow-up from regional to mainline and entry only from the bottom at starvation compensation, even for highly experienced new hire pilots. B-scale was a huge mistake. No need to repeat it with a D-scale. Maybe you'd throw in a no-strike provision as a management inticement? Yea, I sure everyone would vote for that . . . not.

BTW, ALPA spent quite a bit of money courting APA membership and was rejected. Although I am an inactive member of ALPA, I don't favor reaffliating with them.

Even as an opener, AMR didn't even acknowledge the APA's proposal for combined companies. They're obviously not interested in even discussing it in any form.

I'm not throwing rocks, just calling your bluff. You still haven't given me any reason to believe you have any realistic plan whatsoever.

Enough. It's been an interesting discussion, but not enlightening.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Surplus,

Thanks for the post. First of all, let it be said that the attitudes that you condemned did not come from me. I agree that discrimination exists based on airplane size, and I have gone out of my way not to perpetuate that. As far as I am concerned, we are all fellow aviators, with a common foe. I hope that my posts have accurately illustrated this sentiment.

As long as we are on the topic, I would like to point out that the animosity flows in both directions. We have been called egotistical, "Double-breasted a$$holes", one of our pilot has recently been denied a seat on a comair airplane, and members of your group have publicly expressed glee at the prospect of my upcoming furlough. Does this represent the majority of your pilots? Of course not. I hope (and believe) that you realize that the attitudes you have encountered do not represent the majority of us. By the way, the Midway comment that our guy made was asinine, and represented the type of opinion that got us into this mess.

As I said earlier, I will not get into a seniority debate with you. I have enjoyed our discussions, and don't want to see them degrade. You will not convince me, and I will not convince you, so there is no use even trying. But let me assure you that my opinion that a staple is just is not based on any prejudices towards you or your pilot group. It is simply based on what I believe is appropriate based on career expectations, w-2's, etc. I believe a staple to be fair, and not a windfall for either group. I am certain that you will not agree, and I'd be kind of dissappointed if you did! I think that you will agree, however, that we should keep our discussion focused on less contentious issues, like religion, politics, or abortion!

Your posts are too long! I get to talking about one of your points, then forget your next one! Don't get me wrong, I don't want you to shorten them, I'm just complaining because it was the first thing I learned in flight training. I enjoy your posts, and appreciate the thought you put into them.

By the way, I only count 15 pages in the scope section of my contract. (Just wanted to prove I was paying attention! Always have to be wary of a test hidden in people's posts!)

You brought up an argument that has been floating around for a while, that of Comair's profitability. That argument gets so many people heated up, and I think it is pretty funny. Some Delta guys rant on and on about how comair owed its success to us, and comair guys say the same thing about Delta. The fact is, they are both right. It is a mutually beneficial relationship for both airlines. I make no argument that comair has always been a successful airline, and I congratulate you on helping to make it that way. I also know that you would be equally successful had we not purchased you. I will readily accept that many did not want to be bought by Delta, but I think that you need to admit that many of you did. You stated that you were not all "thirsting to be on our seniority list pre-acquisition" and you still aren't. While I am sure that some of you don't want to be on our list, I would venture to say that many, if not most, of your pilot group does. I don't know that for a fact, but based on my experiences as a "regional" pilot, the amount of applications we have, conversations I have with friends at comair, and the amount of people who have already given up CMR numbers to come to DAL, I am pretty sure that I am correct. Of course, neither of us knows for sure, but I think that you are understating the desires of some of your members to be a part of our list. Perhaps I am wrong. It wouldn't be the first time.

I think that you are overestimating the effect of a successful PID request. I disagree that it would have prevented a strike, as we gave management no indication that we would not support you. Do you honestly believe that they thought we would fly struck work? I am pretty sure that despite our bickering, management did not assume we were willing to scab and fly your routes.

You stated that the rjdc would not have sued, as the evidence necessary to prove unfair rep. would not have existed. Yet in earlier posts, you said the main focus of the rjdc was unfair rep. resulting from our scope clause. I do agree that they underestimated your resolve, and I congratulate you on a fight well fought. You guys certainly helped raise the bar, and I don't think enough people give you the credit you deserve. You certainly impressed me.

You believe that the fact that our MEC's would meet and confer would have eliminated the need for our "predatory scope". I disagree. I believe that our negotiators were sent to the table with clear instructions from our pilot group: get strong scope! It may not be the most important issue to our group, but it is one of them. I assure you, it will be an even higher priority come the next contract.


Listen, I do not disagree that the PID should have been granted. I have never argued against it, and I fully support your right to sue about it. (you know what parts of the suit I don't support!) I just don't see it as the magic elixer that you do. As a matter of fact, the methods used to merge the lists probably would have led to even more animosity. I don't recall too many seniority integrations that resulted in happy pilot groups.

I am, however, willing to concede that I may be wrong. I don't know if the PID would have helped. You seem to think that it would. You may be right. As of now, neither of us can be sure. It is interesting to speculate, however.

You seem to think that because I don't think onelist is possible, I have given up on a solution. Quite the opposite. In fact, that is the reason for this thread, to hear ideas about how we could achieve our goals. I don't think that onelist will ever occur. That does not mean that I would not be willing to try, given a realistic strategy. I have never advocated giving up, nor will I.

 

[tbkane]

Fly Delta Jets,

I just wanted to post conformation from the junior pilots on the list. I to and everyone I know would not accept anything but a staple.

Before I get flamebated, I want to say I spent four years at ASA and earned my position on furlough. I do not find it fair that one of my fo's could possibly become senior to me, when I earned the job at DAL, and now am really earning it on furlough, while they are flying, and then move in senior to me so that I could be furloughed again!

One list could happen, but I would rather leave ALPA than lose senority.

 

[surplus1]

It's too long again. Shucks.

TO: FlyDeltaJets,

Thank you for the excellent response. Yes, your posts do indicate your personal sentiments as well as your commitment. I can see that the attitudes I referenced do not come from you. That is why I devote so much energy to communicating with you. I realize we don't agree on some of the issues nor on some of my ideas re solutions. That's not a problem. We are engaged in a dialogue and that is what's important. Agreement can never be achieved without the exchange of ideas. If this type of dialogue could take place between our leaders, there might be a possibility of reaching common ground. No matter how difficult, I think it would be better than what we have done so far and are doing now (Ref. the leaders).

I agree there is animosity in both directions. I don't think it would be productive to debate whether the chicken or the egg came first, so I won't go there. I also agree that the references I made do NOT apply to ALL Delta pilots by a long shot. I believe the majority of Delta pilots are just aviators and nice people. I think the same of the majority of Comair pilots. I also agree that both properties contain an "a**hole factor" that is the same percentage wise (in all airlines). The recent JS incident you mentioned is demonstrative of that. I tried to point out that my assessment of attitudes came from D-pilots in positions of leadership and also from mainline pilots at other airlines (also in leadership positions) and union officials (pilots all) resident in the beltway offices. As I see it, those folks are the "fly in the ointment". If I knew you personally I could give you many direct examples that I would never post on a public board. That IS what got us into this mess.

I agree that we shouldn't get into a p***ing contest over seniority. I also think that you have assumed incorrectly that I would want something that you could not live with. The problem is semantics and the devil is in the details. A huge gap in our thinking does not exist. How we define "staple" is the bridge that can span the misunderstanding.

I'll just say this: In my idea of how it might be done (if it happened tomorrow), not a single Delta pilot on your list today would lose even one number or any of the rights associated with that number that he/she has today. At the same time, not a single pilot on the Comair list today would lose any of the rights that he/she has today. There would be no "flush" ever; no one on either side would forfeit the future vacancy bidding rights that he/she has today on the respective property. Not a single soul would be displaced unless he/she voluntarily chose to be. Longevity for Section 3 pay would survive, unless the pilot voluntarily bid across lines, i.e., CMR/ASA to DAL or DAL to ASA/CMR.

For practical purposes, I would define my ideas as a "protected staple". While we do not agree 100%, we may be a lot closer than you may have guessed. There are a few unmentioned points that I have not included because I think they would cloud the issue. I hope you don't find my position "disappointing" in the context of your presumption.

I couldn't agree more that my posts are too long. I try desperately to shorten them but alas, verbosity is one of my salient faults. What my own pilot group says about it is a lot more severe than your comments. I enjoy your posts and ideas as well.

Ha! You broke the code AND you passed the scope test too (15 pages it is). I knew there was a smart RD pilot somewhere. I'm glad I discovered you for the search as been fatiguing. (LOL)

Reference the profitability discussion, I agree that the relationship pre-acquisition was both symbiotic and mutually beneficial. In the years when Delta was profitable, you made many more $$ than we did. Quite natural due to your much greater size. (Excluding the strike) Comair has been profitable in all but one of its 25 years of existence. The rate of return on investment has been triple that of Delta. For such a small company, the annual net was truly amazing. As far as satisfaction with the purchase, on the day it came down nearly 4000 people were literally in tears. I was there. Of course, they are not all pilots and there were exceptions (mostly in management positions). Given the golden parachutes that senior management so generously awarded themselves a mere three months before Delta's proffer it is not at all surprising that their eyes were less than teary.

To really understand what I meant about not "thirsting to be on your list" you would also have to understand the demographics of our pilot group. With very high growth rates we have been hiring a lot of new pilots (as you well know). While the rate of attrition was exceptionally low (for a "regional"), the influx of new people was simultaneously quite high. At times the list literally doubled in only 5 years. For a time, a high percentage of the new hires were typical of most regional pilots, i.e., their first real flying job. I would venture that 100% of that group came to CMR with the idea of moving on to a "real airline" as soon as they could. At other times our "new hires" were mostly recycled airline pilots (like myself) and military pilots. Quite similar to the people you hire.

There was however another "difference" at Comair that I think is absent in a majority of regional airlines. It is also true that I have never met a single mainline pilot willingly ready to acknowledge its reality. Comair had a "culture" of its own. While it was naturally evolving, that culture nevertheless existed. It takes on the average, about three years for a non-recycled new hire to be assimilated and for him to recognize and become a part of that culture. To figure out that Comair, though small, was in fact a "real airline". Once that process of assimilation was completed, the pilots "thirst to move on" waned significantly in a majority of cases. He changed, became a member of the team and the thirst to travel became a desire to grow and build something special. We used to call it affectionately "The Best Little Airline in America". When Delta, Inc. coerced us into putting your livery on our jets, there were few happy pilots. We had an identity of our own and we did not want it to be buried in a hail of Widgets. While our history pales by comparison with that of TWA, I suspect they felt much the same as we did when they first had to fly something with double A on the tail.

Of course, there were still people that left in search of more money, but when a regional airline has an attrition rate (during a hiring boom like the recent past) of less than 7%, it is pretty safe to say what I said.

Continue to Part II

 

[surplus1]

Part II To: FlyDeltaJets

(Continued)

Following the purchase, there WAS a change and a big one. Reality today is quite different from yesterday. The truth is the airline known as Comair, ceased to exist in the year 2000 on the day the transaction was closed. There IS no more Comair. It is just a piece of paper. There is no longer any reason for the younger pilots (now 1/2 or more of the list) to stay at Comair. There is NO such thing as Comair any more. I recognize that reality and I think most Comair pilots do also. More often than not, that is why RC names increasingly appear on foreign lists. (Don't you just love nostalgia?)

Based on today, I did understate the desires of folks to leave. Since I'm a yesterday person (as indicated by my handle), I acknowledge that I sometimes live with the memories when it comes to this sort of thing and not in real time.

Maybe I am wrong about the impact of a successful PID. Even I know that I'm not perfect. With respect to the strike and management's assessment, I did NOT mean they thought you would fly struck work. No one, that I am aware of, believed that. No one, including management ever thought you would scab. However, management did know that you would not rise up and stand shoulder to shoulder in defense of our objectives; you didn't. And, management did know that the ALPA level of support would be no more than legally required; it wasn't. Management was right in both cases.

Management did know what they were being told by leaders in the national union (ironically we didn't) during their private meetings with those leaders. And yes, such meetings did take place without the knowledge or consent of the Comair MEC, repeatedly both before and during the negotiations. Among the participants was the sitting President of the ALPA.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I still believe that had we had your unqualified support and that of the ALPA, the outcome would have been different and the strike might have been avoided. FDJ, I know that you (and most of your peers) have no idea of the intensity of the pressure to "cave in" that was placed on our MEC and our negotiating committee by the National union. I'll ask one question to illustrate. How many Delta pilots would you guess are aware of the fact that while the Comair MEC was asking Comair pilots to vote against a Company proposal, the Executive Administrator of the ALPA was simultaneously sending individual mailgrams to every Comair pilot encouraging them to accept the Company's offer (while our pilots were walking the line)? Would you call that "support" of our efforts? Would that behavior fly at Delta itself? Well, it didn't at Comair. We voted no by margins that staggered the imagination of both ALPA and the Company; not once but twice. You don't have to believe me, FDJ. Find out for yourself.

Fortunately for me, I no longer have to be "politically correct". The truth needs to be aired. There is no other way to remove the odor of what goes on in DC. I've grown tired of pretending that a dead carcass doesn't smell. It reeks.

With respect to the RJDC and the suit, there is no inconsistency or conflict in what I said. I believe that the results of a successful PID would have eliminated the DFR issues and the Scope issues simultaneously, thus removing most allegations of the suit. IMO, with a successful PID, Delta pilots (now joined with CMR pilots) would have access to the RJ flying in the Delta System, thus eliminating the need for scope directed against the subsidiaries. We would have been joined together on scope against outsourcing instead.

I do not believe that our MEC's would "meet and confer" post successful PID. I believe our MEC's would be merged, i.e., one and the same and for real (not the c**p that's going on at CAL). One MEC, one decision, end of conflict. The instructions to your negotiators would have changed and new instruction issued, with the full agreement and consent of Delta pilots (all of "us"). Strong Scope by all means; just aimed in the right direction.
I don't seek a "magic elixir". What I seek is a unified pilot group encompassing the Delta System that includes DAL and the two subsidiaries that are already a defacto part of ONE Company.

I don't want to deal with corporate shell games and make-believe separate airlines. We are one in every way and should stop pretending that we are not. The purpose of Scope is to keep jobs IN the Company. We have only ONE Company and it is Delta Air Lines. Calling it by three different names doesn't change that. ASA and Comair are today no less fictitious than the infamous Enron subsidiaries. Scope IN the Delta flying (which includes ASA and Comair). Scope out the contract flying (all of it). In the process, cease and desist from imposing economic obstacles that would force the Company to fight for survival. Don't attempt to force a corporate merger.

If ASA and Comair were NOT wholly owned subsidiaries, then I would expect to be scoped out. Like you, I disagree with outsourcing and I think we should close the door that we opened to allow it. I just don't think that a wholly owned subsidiary, whose revenue in total goes to the same corporate entity, is outsourcing. It is not, unless we choose to make it so for ulterior motives. Making it so, plays directly into the hands of management. That's what they want and we are giving it to them while we fight among ourselves over which shell hides the pea. That's their game, we're playing it by their rules and right now they are winning it hands down, thanks to our own folly.

Finally, the only thing that generates unhappiness in mergers among pilots, is the abrogation of somebody's seniority. Eliminate that (which I believe my concepts do) and the unhappiness will die on all sides of the vine. It's a simple principle. The fact that we haven't done it before is OUR fault. We should stop the excuses; stop inventing obstacles and get on with the show.

I know I don't necessarily have the best idea, the only idea or the perfect idea but I do have an idea. Anyone else is more than welcome to come up with a better solution. I don't necessarily want something that I thought of, I just want something that works. Right now both the union and the pilot groups are disfunctional with respect to this issue. All the scope in the world will not result in the disappearance of the small jets. How much they proliferate and how big they get will be dictated by market forces, not pilots. If we as pilots don't get on the wagon we will simply be left behind in the dust.

I'm glad you haven't given up. I haven't either. And no, I don't want to destroy ALPA. I want to RESTORE ALPA to what it is supposed to be. If that means new leaders in Washington, then good riddance to the one's we have now. I want men of vision to replace stagnant politicians who devote more energy to maintaining or enhancing their power than representing their constituents.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this post are my own personal opinions. I am not a spokesperson for the RJDC or any other organization. My posts are not directed, approved or controlled by the RDJC or any other organization including the Comair MEC. I receive no direct input from the RJDC or any of its principals, nor from the CMRMEC and I have no knowledge as to whether the RJDC or the CMRMEC agrees or disagrees with any opinions expressed in this or any other of my posts. Surplus1

 

[surplus1]

BTW, ALPA spent quite a bit of money courting APA membership and was rejected. Although I am an inactive member of ALPA, I don't favor reaffliating with them.

I'm not unhappy about that. Out of curiousity, do you think it was realted to the timing of their effort coinciding with the TWA merger or simply that you all prefer to do your own thing?

Even as an opener, AMR didn't even acknowledge the APA's proposal for combined companies. They're obviously not interested in even discussing it in any form.

Of course they weren't interersted. Not so sure if that means "in any form" or in the form that you proposed. Time will tell.

I can't help but notice you didn't touch on the impact your proposal would have (if accepted) on the Eagle pilots. Any reason? And please, spare me the from the idea that you were doing it for their benefit.

I'm not throwing rocks, just calling your bluff. You still haven't given me any reason to believe you have any realistic plan whatsoever.

That's OK, I'm not bothered. Since we're not in a poker game I don't have to show no matter how often you call. I choose not to.

Enough. It's been an interesting discussion, but not enlightening.

Sorry you're not satisfied. I don't worry too much about the enlightening part. Guess that's becasue on this issue there haven't been many lights in the heads of mainline pilots for a very long time. Your failure to be enlightened is the rule, not the exception. Just the same, I'd rather you were Navy than USAF with that attitude. I take that back, you sound more like Marine. Sorry Navy.

I do wish it were not so, but I guess you just can't please all of the people all of the time.

Standing by for incoming.

On another subject. How'd you like the B-1? I sure looks good and it fascinates me. Fun to fly?