Compass agreement

[~~~^~~~]

I can tell you this. This bi-lateral flow that DALPA has talked about does a few things and look at it for what it is.
It give a bone to the DCI pilots. It is not much, but it allows a mainline slot, the golden egg if you will.
What it really does is this.

See DCI costs are now legacy costs. DAL know it, ALPA knows it. What that means is two things. One they need bigger jets to amortize costs across more seats, and two, they need to get their longevity costs in check. Having a flow that resets longevity of said pilots reduces the pilot costs at DCI. Keeps the longevity at around year four instead of where it is now at year 8 or nine. See DCI has done so well that it now has costs are border mainlines. Don't want to believe me, do the E and A that has been resolved to do. It appears that you already know what the results would be. You just do not want the data to be used in a one list arguement. Management seems to think that the DCI costs are too high.

They have tried putting bigger jets on DCI, and it has not helped. They tried outsourcing to "younger" carriers, and it has not helped, They have tried to consolidate ops where possible, and it has not helped. Look at their actions and tell me there really is another reason for it.

Unity... accept NO substitute.
​

 

[~~~^~~~]

Do you honestly think that ALPA needs you to pass a resolution at the local level in order for them to do costing on scope?

What is your opinion on the MEC's resolution to not do E&FA on kicking Compass to the curb?

 

[PCL_128]

PCL - you and my ALPA leadership have so convinced me of the benefits of outsourcing that I'd like to try outsourcing ALPA. Call them buffoons if you like, but I'm 110% behind the APA's opener.

I've done no such thing. You know full well that I can't stand outsourcing. I'm just trying to inject some realism into this discussion. Zero-seat scope is not realistic at this stage in the game. Deal with it.

And yes, the APA leadership is completely off their rockers and will soon get parked by the NMB.

 

[PCL_128]

What is your opinion on the MEC's resolution to not do E&FA on kicking Compass to the curb?

I've heard of no such resolution. What I heard is that they've delayed the decision. Is that not correct?

 

[mynameisjim]

I've heard of no such resolution. What I heard is that they've delayed the decision. Is that not correct?

Correct, that is not correct.

BE IT RESOLVED no action taken on AI 09-50 “Compass Integration Cost/Benefit Analysis.”

*Resolution passed unanimously

 

[JoeMerchant]

I've heard of no such resolution. What I heard is that they've delayed the decision. Is that not correct?

Not only is that not correct...they don't seem to want to talk about it much....

 

[~~~^~~~]

I've done no such thing. You know full well that I can't stand outsourcing. I'm just trying to inject some realism into this discussion. Zero-seat scope is not realistic at this stage in the game. Deal with it.

And yes, the APA leadership is completely off their rockers and will soon get parked by the NMB.

PCL - You are right that zero seat scope is not realistic at this stage, but capturing the E175 is a reasonable start, at least worth evaluation.

All I'm asking for is economic analysis and an ALPA that has a favorable policy towards unity.

The reality is that our union is blatantly hostile to unity and supportive of outsourcing. That policy is a failing strategy that will be exploited by those who use ALPA's conflicting duties as leverage against pilots.

It is what it is.

APA's negotiations help set the standard for the rest of us. I fully support their negotiations and wish them the very best.

 

[PCL_128]

PCL - You are right that zero seat scope is not realistic at this stage, but capturing the E175 is a reasonable start, at least worth serious evaluation.

I agree. But even that will require using some of your leverage to achieve it, and that means giving up something that you could have gained in another area. This is something that you want that management doesn't. That means you have to burn negotiating leverage to make it happen. That's all I'm saying.

All I'm asking for is economic analysis and an ALPA that has a favorable policy towards unity.

You might want to try a resolution that just asks for economic analysis, then. They might move on that where they wouldn't move on the full resolution that talked about adding Compass to your list. One step at a time if you can't get the whole shebang in one fell swoop.

The reality is that our union is blatantly hostile to unity and supportive of outsourcing.

I completely disagree, and I see no evidence of that. You've had a setback with your MEC, and you're projecting that onto the entire Association. No reason for that. Keep politicking with your MEC and see what you can come up with. I'm sure there's a middle ground that will allow you to move this thing forward. Start with the economic analysis mentioned above. It's a start.

 

[mynameisjim]

You might want to try a resolution that just asks for economic analysis, then. They might move on that where they wouldn't move on the full resolution that talked about adding Compass to your list. One step at a time if you can't get the whole shebang in one fell swoop.

Did you see my post on the previous page? The resolution the MEC shot down was just a cost/benefit analysis, as far as I know.

 

[PCL_128]

Did you see my post on the previous page? The resolution the MEC shot down was just a cost/benefit analysis, as far as I know.

I'm pretty sure that they were going off of the resolution that was passed at Council 44 that went much further than just a cost analysis. But I could be wrong.