Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Combining the seniority lists

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Surplus -
As far as reaffilitation with ALPA, maybe something to do with the merger, but I think mostly wanting not to lose any control to a national organization, plus maybe not want dues increases with ALPA. In short, I don't see ALPA being a significant benefit vs. the loss of full autonomy and additional costs.

Since AMR failed to even acknowledge the combining offer, much less even counter, I assume they're not interested. As far as what AE guys thought of concept, you'll have to ask some of them. If it was 18 months ago, I'd bet they be very receptive.

B-1? Very fast. Easy to fly, but unforgiving to mishandling. Outstanding bomb load and combat capability. Very complex systemwise with consequent high maintenance.
 
Draginass said:
Surplus -
As far as reaffilitation with ALPA, maybe something to do with the merger, but I think mostly wanting not to lose any control to a national organization, plus maybe not want dues increases with ALPA. In short, I don't see ALPA being a significant benefit vs. the loss of full autonomy and additional costs.

I sure don't blame you on the loss of autonomy question. AA is big enought to throw its weight around, but not big enough to out-vote a coalition. I think autonomy is what keeps SWAPA out of ALPA too. For an airline their size, they would lose completely any real voice in their own affairs. That I know first hand.

B-1? Very fast. Easy to fly, but unforgiving to mishandling. Outstanding bomb load and combat capability. Very complex systemwise with consequent high maintenance.

Sort of what I expected you'd say. I envy you. By coincidence, you and I have flown some of the same hardware, but when I was in USAF the B-1 or anything like it did not exist. I used to drool over the B-58 back when, but never got near it.

Take care.
 
Last edited:
Wow.

Yes, I did read it all. Yes, I did learn something, mostly that I don't know as much about this issue as I thought I did. Also, that my way of presenting the facts as I knew them only caused further arguement, while Surplus actually has FDJ talking to him like an equal. Surplus, you are my new hero. FDJ, I have new respect and admiration for you, even though I still disagree with a few of your views.

For anyone who says they havn't learned anything by this discussion, I suppose you are entitled to your opinion. Or, perhaps you are just lying to try to make sure no Delta pilot finds out who you are and keeps you from being hired there because of your views.

As for the flying struck work thing, nobody would expect Delta pilots to be scabs. However, since there was so much screaming about Comair's struck work policy on this board, perhaps management would find a way to convince you that it really didn't apply to you. Like they said it wouldn't after we were no longer in existance (but since we are a paper airline, I guess they could say that now, right?).

In any case, I'm now more conviced than ever that the rjdc lawsuit was justified, and the right thing to do, AND that it will result in a better career for ALL ALPA represented pilots. This is just my opinion, and nothing else, so don't try to get me to justify it. Good luck to all. Hopefully, we shall soon see.
 
SDD,

Thanks for the compliment. I hope that I have always treated people like equals, not just recently! There have been times that I have argued with people on this board, and some of the discussions got a little nasty. If I got a little aggressive with someone, it was because A.) I disagreed with them AND B.) the tone of the conversation was getting a little rough.

For future reference, if and when I get into another shouting match, it will happen because I got pi$$ed at someone, not because I think I am superior to them!


I know what you mean about the tone of the discussions, however. These are much better. You and surplus know your stuff. The only problem is, you're wrong!;)

Fly safe.
 
FlyDeltasJets said:
SDD,

You and surplus know your stuff. The only problem is, you're wrong!;)


Good one. You actually made me laugh out loud. A little pun helps now and then.

Hope you had a nice Easter.

BTW, are you at Express or holding something better?
 
I would be willing to admit that we are wrong, as long as you admit that you are arrogant, fair enough? ;-P

Anyway, one thing I'm sure we can agree on, that Delta's tactic of telling us to go home with our tail between our legs didn't work out as predicted. You may disagree with us, and I would probably be dissapointed if you didn't, but you do have to deal with us. I think that if we hadn't filed the rjdc lawsuit, you wouldn't even be talking to us about this, much less doing all the research and hard work that you obviously have put into this.

I see you as a worthy advisary, FDJ. and wish you good luck and high fortune, no matter how all of this shakes out.

SDD
 
The thing that I don't understand about the RJDC and a merged seniority list concerns career expectations.

When I was applying to the airlines, I looked at several factors when deciding which airlines to apply to. One of the factors was career expectations. I spoke with friends and studied data and calculated a "rough guess" of where I might be and when (at year X, I will be an F/O on aircraft Y making $Z... When I retire, I will have worked X years for the company, resulting in roughly $Y for my retirement).

I'm assuming the folks at the regionals did the same. They either decided:
1) The regionals would allow them to build enough hours to be hired by Delta.
2) Delta wasn't hiring, so the regionals are the best place for them until Delta start hiring again.
3) they were comfortable with the career expectations when they made their decision (at year X, I will be the F/O on aircraft Y making $Z... When I retire, I will have worked X years for the company, resulting in roughly $Y for my retirement).

Based on this assumption, I have a hard time understanding the rationale behind the notion that a merged/stapled list is a right or an expectation of the RJ pilots.

I know every pilot wants to be maximize pay and quality of life, but I don't think any Comair pilot signed on the dotted line because they expected the seniority list to be merged/stapled and they would soon be flying 767's. Am I way off base here?
 
One more time for clarity...

A merged list is NOT the goal of the RJDC.

If you don't understand what this means, or why I said it, please look at the numerous posts by Surplus1 on the subject. I don't know why I have to keep saying this, but some people still don't understand.
 
Mr Boeing,
To answer your questions a different way, just plug in the word TWA pilot where you have Comair pilot, and ask the same questions. Perhaps this will help you some.
 
SDD,

You say one list is not a goal of the RJDC, but some of your posts indicate the contrary.

skydiverdriver said:
Again, the rjdc lawsuit is misrepresented, and misunderstood. It's not just about onelist...I believe since we kindly asked your MEC to talk about a onelist proposal, and they refused, you should petition your MEC to come to us with a proposal...I totally agree that even if the rjdc gets everything they want, it will NOT, and I repeat, not result in a merger. HOwever, by their bylaws, ALPA is required to do everything in their power to try to get one accomplished. NOw, read that again, they cannot affect a merger, but they are required to try. This is the essense of what the rjdc is suing for. Everyone knows that ALPA cannot make it happen, but their own bylaws require them to TRY...

A couple of observations:

1) By stating "not just about onelist," you imply that onelist is a goal (just not the only goal).

2) You also say "they cannot affect a merger, but they are required to try. That is the essense of what the rjdc is suing for." Again, it seems like a merger is at least a peripheral goal of the RJDC.

The reason you have to state things "one more time for clarity" is because you're not being clear. I did reread your posts and, no I still don't understand. You're sending mixed signals when you include the above excerpts in your posts, yet say the RJDC doesn't want a merged list. Am I wrong?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top