Delta Pilot Deal Allows Huge Increase In 70-Seat Flying

[chperplt]

My guess, for what its worth, (which in reality is nothing) is that they will be coming after the commuters next to make them more competitive!

I'm sure they will.. But they (DAL) don't have the same leverage against us that they did with you. They will be told to pound sand!

 

[surplus1]

Lets say I agree with everything you say. (I don't but for the sake of argument) Ok, I understand that the floor is below what you currently fly. But, before there was a floor at all, what protection did you have? The answer is none. They could have transferred all of your 70 seaters and some or all of the 50 seaters. I admit, this protection is not perfect, far from it. You have to do 25% of DAL flying. What did you have before? I am not trying to say that this is the greatest scope in the world, but compared to what you had before, it is a step in the right direction. Are you so jaded you cannot see that?

Yes Mike, I agree it looks like 25% is better than zero percent. In fact it is of virtually no significance since they can still transfer all of our 70-seaters and some of our 50-seaters. Additionally, the 25% is for ASA and CMR. In effect that means CMR could have 24% and ASA 1% or vice versa. That is why I said the provision facilitates whipsaw between the two carriers. It is not more than it was before, it is just not an improvement. Besides they can easily dispose of one of us, which erases the proviso completely.

I also agree that we had "nothing before" and in practical application we still have nothing. The reason for having nothing before was ALPA's refusal to allow us to negotiate with the principal, i.e., Delta Air Lines. It is not possible to negotiate any meaningful Scope with CMR management for they have no control of any flying at all. Chautauqua pilots can negotiate scope if they choose. ASA and Comair pilots cannot, there is noone to negotiate with at CMR or ASA. Those are puppet managments that exist on paper.

Had we been able to negotiate with Delta we might not have been successful but at least we could say we tried and failed. All we can say now is that our union prevented us from negotiating in our own behalf. Why did it do that? Because our union's policy is that the mainline pilot group controls the flying and is designated, by ALPA, to negotiate on our behalf whatever it deems appropriate, without our consent. It can give or take, without limit and regardless of our wishes. Last time I checked we could not elect representatives to the Delta MEC. Since our own representatives are not permitted to negotiate the most important item in our PWA, who is representing our interests? It certainly isn't anyone at ALPA Int'l.

If the union were to tell Delta pilots (of course I know it won't) that Comair pilots were going to negotiate and determine your Scope and the extent or limits of your flying would you accept that? Somehow I don't think you would. Why should we?

I sure hope ALPA doesn't try to sell this as a successful effort at "brand scope", but it wouldn't surprise me at all. They can always count on a certain number of suckers in the regionals that will buy whatever garbage they peddle.

Given the leverage we had (none) I am surprised they got even a 25% floor for the wholly owneds. But again, if you don't like it, if you think you were better off without it, get both your MECs to pass resolutions saying you would like it removed. I am sure the Delta MEC and certainly Delta management would be more than happy to comply.

Given the leverage that you say you didn't have and with which I agree, you didn't "get 25%". Things, especially control issues, are not given away by management unless they get something in return. Are you trying to tell me that you "bought" the 25% from Delta management? With what? Besides that, you already know that I not only don't expect you to use your leverage on our behalf, I really don't want you negotiating for us at all. In any case spending your negotiation capital in our benefit would be a 180 deg. change of direction. Sorry, but I just don't see you as "born again".

That is exactly why I said you didn't "get" anything and you certainly didn't "give" us anything. Good, bad or indifferent, LOA-46 is what it is (in Scope)because that's what Delta management wanted it to be. Like you say you had no leverage or very little. Your MEC certainly wasn't going to spend any negotiating capital on securing something for ASA and CMR (and I would not expect them to). When you had tons of negotiating capital your MEC didn't spend one red cent of it on our behalf. On the contrary you used it against our interests. How can you now expect me to believe that you spent a dollar on us when I already know you only had 50 cents going in? I admit I'm not bright but I didn't fall off a turnip truck either.

I have no doubt that the Delta MEC would be pleased if it had not come out the way it did and would not mind making the "new scope" more to its liking so yes, I'm sure you'd be happy to remove that 25% clause and most of the others. Since I believe that Delta management already has what it wanted, I suspect they couldn't care less what resolutions the ASA or CMR MEC's might pass. They are going to do what they want to do regardless. Since they have already done to the mighty "DALPA" what they wanted to do, I'm quite sure they're not worried about us.

Delta management has already shown what it thinks about Comair MEC resolutions and spent $700 millions proving it. I doubt they've changed much, they just don't have that kind of money to p_ss away any more, and in this environment they don't need it.

Bottom line is this doesn't change any of what I said before. The Scope section of LOA-46 is not beneficial to Delta pilots and offers no consequential benefit to ASA and CMR pilots. It facilitates and encourages more outsourcing of your work and of our work and will increase whipsaw. It is a total victory for the Company.

No matter how much you polish a turd it remains a turd, Mike. Is it the Delta pilots fault? NO, not this time specifically. Is it ALPA's fault? YES! This is the consequence of ALPA's flawed scope policies. To the extent that you have supported these ALPA policies and you have, you share the culpability for the results. Are YOU so jaded that YOU cannot see that?

 

[737 Pylt]

I'm sure they will.. But they (DAL) don't have the same leverage against us that they did with you. They will be told to pound sand!

Chper:
I hope you do! Quite frankly, the more expensive you are to operate, the more flying that gets shifted back to mainline!
737

 

[chperplt]

Quite frankly, the more expensive you are to operate, the more flying that gets shifted back to mainline!

737

I truly wish they would expand mainline flying. I don't wish Comair/ASA growth at your expense, and to wish mainline growth at our expense is rather sad.

Oh.. and we're not more expensive to operate than CHQ or SKYW. Delta makes more money per flight on one of us than on the contract carriers regardless of how low their pay is. Fred said that himself a few months ago.

I would think you would want DAL to make as much money as they can, which would be keeping the flying in house. When I say in house, I mean under the same corporate banner because I realize we aren't "company."

 

[homerjdispatch]

737

Oh.. and we're not more expensive to operate than CHQ or SKYW. Delta makes more money per flight on one of us than on the contract carriers regardless of how low their pay is. Fred said that himself a few months ago.

I would like to see some hard numbers on that!

 

[737 Pylt]

737

I truly wish they would expand mainline flying. I don't wish Comair/ASA growth at your expense, and to wish mainline growth at our expense is rather sad.

Thanks. DCI has had unprecedented growth for the last 3 years, all at the expense of mainline (and furloughs). And because of the most leinent scope clause, DCI has continued to grow even more!

Oh.. and we're not more expensive to operate than CHQ or SKYW. Delta makes more money per flight on one of us than on the contract carriers regardless of how low their pay is. Fred said that himself a few months ago.

You know the saying about management. If their lips are moving, you know they're lying!

I would think you would want DAL to make as much money as they can, which would be keeping the flying in house. When I say in house, I mean under the same corporate banner because I realize we aren't "company."

You're right, I do want DAL to make as much money as possible. Contrary to popular belief, the rj has a much higher casm than an MD88. That's a proven fact. Maybe mainline can get some of the routes back that they were flying prior to 9/11.
As far as CHQ, DAL really blew it by outsourcing to them. ALL flying should be done by people in the DAL family.
737

 

[bvt1151]

I would like to see some hard numbers on that!

CHQ is cheaper to operate, but Delta still has to pay their profit, which results in them being more expensive than both ASA and Comair. Fred hesitently admitted that himself. This is significant when considering that Fred was there to prime us for concessions. He screwed up and spilled information he did not want us to have. There was no reason for him to make it up as it just makes his job infinitely more difficult. This is reason enough to consider the info true. But if you really want hard numbers, they are there. You'll have to use a combination of BTS, CHQ 10-Q, and DAL 10-Q to derive them. Simply, compare CHQ's rasm's to Comair's casm's. This is the difference in wholly-owned and contract carriers. No big suprise.

 

[KingAirer]

As far as CHQ, DAL really blew it by outsourcing to them. ALL flying should be done by people in the DAL family.
737

Exactly, CHQ was the first company to be a "contract" carrier for Delta.

 

[AFELLOWAVIATOR]

My understanding is they pay CHQ the same per flight as they pay us. We could charge Delta 50,000 per flight and Delta would still make more money off of us because they get to keep all the profits.


IT is shameless how they insist on loosing money just to make a point by using SKY and CHQ.

 

[Snapperhead]

I never understood why American Eagle is flying for Delta out of LA. Can anyone shed any light on that?

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

When Delta asked us to take over the LA gig someone at ASA said "Oh that is too far away from ATL, we couldn't manage it".

 

[Slim]

That request (LAX flying) was made of CMR prior to the strike and, maybe, before DAL purchased CMR.

The way I heard it was that CMR didn't have enough airplanes and pilots for the LAX flying. Then, again, that was several years ago and no longer feasible. Soon, CMR will no longer fly to the west coast. If there was a credible oppourtunity for CMR to do the flying AE does now, it was when we were flying to SJC.

Fly safe!

 

[General Lee]

You CMR guys probably didn't like the SBA or Helena, MT flying anyways. Nothing beats the NE flying---right?



Bye Bye--General Lee (4 long SAN layovers next month)

 

[MetroSheriff]

When Delta asked us to take over the LA gig someone at ASA said "Oh that is too far away from ATL, we couldn't manage it".

ROFL

Distance does not seem to be a factor. They can't manage the ATL operationand it is only 1000 yards from the Puzzle Palace.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

You got that right...GO might as well be next to HKNA..