Holly blast from the ALPA (scope) Past

[LearLove]

So I'm doin some early spring cleaning and taxes at the same time. Smashed between some old college stuff I find an air inc article from 1997 March. SWA was on the cover but it also had an interview with the then ALPA pres R. Babbitt. Check out what he says about scope, I scanned it into the computer so I hope it shows up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
part of the article:

ALPC: Scope seems to be becoming a hot topic during airline contract negations. Would you share some of your views on the scope issue?

Babbitt: The difficulty arose probably from some shortsightedness during the early days of deregulation. I say shortsightedness — I blame us, ALPA, as much as anybody, myself included. I was a member of a negotiating team at the time and the carriers came to us and said, "Look, you know we're deregulated and we are going to sell those Convairs, those Electras, DC-7s or whatever, simply because they are not profitable anymore. We're not going to fly into small cities anymore, but you wouldn't mind if PBA or some other commuter did it, would you?" We said, "No, as long as you respect our scope clause, we'll give you permission." In retrospect, with the incredible clarity that 20 years of hindsight will bring, we should have said, "Yes, we care, it's our plan. If the company wants to buy some Beech 99s or F-27s, we'll fly them. We'll put a section in our contract. Set up a division and have a system similar to a farm team. But, one seniority list." Sure, we might have had to change some work rules, but that's been going on for a long time, too. We have international rules and now we have shuttle rules with some carriers. We could have had regional rules. That's where the problem was hatched. The solution in my view would be that we need to acknowledge that this is airline system flying. In other words, if you fly for USAir, the flying done by all of USAir and its code-sharing partners should be USAir system flying. There should be a provision that those regional pilots will someday migrate to the mainline carrier. They are already flying the colors; they have the corporate loyalty. This is just a convenient bypass mechanism the carriers have instituted to keep us somewhat apart.

ALPC: So if a pilot is flying a regional jet, then they should be on the mainline seniority list?

Babbitt: Sure.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[LearLove]

HMMMMM.........

 

[General Lee]

But not at "Date of hire" at their original airline. We would have stapled them at Delta---but the senior regional guys wanted date of hire seniority.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Caveman]

GL,

Please reference any document, e-mail, press release, letter, or anything else from an elected CMR or ASA representative that asks for a DOH merger. Also please reference anything from an elected DAL rep offering a staple. I can't seem to find anything. I was wondering where you got your info.

I know that our written request for a PID was denied but I wasn't aware that any merger negotiations had ever taken place. When did we officially request a DOH merger? When did you guys officially offer a staple? I must have missed that......

 

[wms]

but the senior regional guys wanted date of hire seniority.

If it is true, the number would have been so small that it would not have been a factor. There are still those who feel that way, but are way out-numbered. I think ALPA was using that as an excuse not to staple the lists, or as a way to keep the pilot groups divided. There was a lot of animosity at the time because the ASA/CA MECs went around DALPA to ALPA national to merge the lists. I don't think there would be the same problem again if it ever made it to a vote, which I don't think it will.

 

[filejw]

Babbit is right and hindsight is of course always 20/20. I still remember 25 years ago seeing a Bandit or Navajo in our co. colors, and I knew it was a mistake. But the old guys in ALPA had other things to worry about, like a raise. They just didn't understand that they needed to control all the flying, and a smaller jet could be used, profitably. They were kind of beat by technology. I didn't expect any foresight from ALPA leadership then, and still don't, even though they are my peers now. As for the Delta guy above, that said "we would have stapled them"; well, ALPA has a Merger policy somewere. And that is what determines seniorty lists. Still does.

Tampa Bay in six ... Still

 

[LearLove]

I didn't mean for this to spark off a debate but was just stunned by what this guy had to say. Guess hindsight is 20/20 and even more so in this industry.

Do you guys think anything would be diff today if PDT had intergrated the Henson guys when they bought them and had US Air done the same with Suburban/Penn when they bought them?

If I had it my way and looking at all that has gone on I think ONE AIRLINE (J-3 to A380) and ONE LIST (senority by DOH).

 

[filejw]

Here is another way to look at it.If pax buy's a ticket PVD DTW LAX.Does he think that the airline is using a less qualified guy to fly him to DTW on that 146, than fly's him to LAX on the 757? No. And the airline would never say they do. But that's the way they end up treating the 146 guy, like he is less qualified. The airline is basically saying to the pax you're worth less on that first leg than the second.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

General,
I am going to have to go with Caveman on this one. There were a few, very few senior guys that were demanding a DOH integration with mainline. And that is from ASA and Comair. Again, back when this whole thing was even considered, the amount of those individuals would have been have offset easily by the scheduled amount of retiring mainline guys. I had a heated debate on the j/s out to SLC one day with a senior FO who THOUGHT there were 'thousands' of ASA/Comair guys that would keep him from the upgrade. I asked him if he could hold Capt now and he said "Sure, but it would be in LAX, DFW or JFK." His 'position' was that all of the ASA/Comair senior Capts would not let him upgrade in 'ATL'. Another mid-list 10 or 12 yr FO who had zero facts in the situation. When I told him of the 'actual' figures in general, stunned is not the word. Complete misinformation was abound....
So two scenario's, the current one with mainline having 1040 guys furloughed or the other, 1040 junior guys on the list, who more than likely would have been made up of ASA/Comair guys. Not the people who are out now.
Doesn't matter now does it...?

 

[doh]

General,
You are being a little revisionist here. At no time did any one offer a staple... at no time.

 

[sleepy]

I didn't really matter what the ASA/Comair or DAL pilots wanted. The arbitrater would have decided what would have happened. It is very unlikely that ASA or Comair pilots would have been given DOH.

 

[TexaSWA]

Ok, I give up...

Who'se Holly?

 

[FDJ2]

There should be a provision that those regional pilots will someday migrate to the mainline carrier. ----------------------------------------------------------------------

That sounds like a flow through provision to me, which DALPA wanted to work with ASA/CMR on back in 1999.

 

[FlyComAirJets]

Yeah, I should have a copy of that "provsion" lying around here somewhere ... oh wait, it never existed.

 

[AA717driver]

ALPA's Merger Policy--To the victor go the spoils. Or, Let the big dog eat.

ALPA hasn't had a merger policy since 1986.

ALPA's Motto: 'What's in it for me?'

TC
Victim of ALPA for over 15 years.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

no, no, no...

EVERYBODY knows that ALPA's motto is "I've got mine. Screw You!"

Seriously though, ALPA's merger policy is career expectations/no windfalls. It doesn't even mentioned seniority, staples, etc. It is vague for a reason.

 

[doh]

FDJ2,
The problem with the flow through is it never happens. The Eagle folk never flowed. Neither did too many of the Coex guys. Flow through is bullshyte unless people can actually exercise their new seniority. That hasn't happened yet and big d wasn't looking to set any precedents. Staple is the answer, but big d doesn't want that either, oh well.

 

[MW44]

Furloughed Again,

The motto was right but instead of ALPA just substitute "the average line pilot". Our problem is that pilots in general are selfish and short-sighted. Unfortunatlely ALPA is run by pilots so we are left without any real unity. The animosity and jealousy between regional vs regional, regional vs major, major vs LCC is ridiculous.


This probably sounds crazy but I think the profession would be much stronger if Alpa was run strictly by Lawyers who were paid with our dues to represent us in all matters. I agree that the biggest mistake Alpa ever made was to allow any flying to be outsourced to cheap labour. Isn't that covered in UNIONS 101? Hindsight is perfect but these guys were living in some kind of a fantasy land if they assumed that management would continue to pay them 20 times what the little guy was making to fly between the same city pairs.

 

[~~~^~~~]

But not at "Date of hire" at their original airline. We would have stapled them at Delta---but the senior regional guys wanted date of hire seniority.

General, you are repeating a lie told to you by your MEC. In reality ALPA mergers are done by paycheck, or equipment type. In either case, that is a staple.

Obviously a staple would have helped the furloughed guys that you claim to care about.

Bottom line was that your MEC Chairman was fixated on getting his military buddies hired at Delta and he felt it was below their caliber to fly an E120, or CRJ. Further, your MEC Chairman made remarks about the ASA’s pilots not meeting Delta’s standards.

The staple was killed at the 2000 Board of Director’s meeting when the current Delta MEC Chairman, Chuck Giambusso, lied about operational integration. The proof of his malfeasance is his signature on the “secret” side letter of agreement which was intended to give bid restricted 727 second officers pilot positions at ASA and Comair. Of course, aside from lying to the BOD, there were rumors in the hall that Delta would leave ALPA if ALPA granted the Connection Carriers’ request for a policy implementation date under the Constitution and Bylaws of the union.

That is the truth and I’m pretty sure you already knew it. I’m disappointed in your post.

~~~^~~~

 

[~~~^~~~]

Re: Re: Holly blast from the ALPA (scope) Past

That sounds like a flow through provision to me, which DALPA wanted to work with ASA/CMR on back in 1999.

DALPA never made a proposal, but it is true that Bob Arnold said ASA was not interested in a flow through and I'm glad he did. This is a Delta MEC rumor which is actually true

There are many reasons why a flow through is a lousy idea. Here are a couple:
1) It segregates piloting jobs into "preferred" and "non preferred" job classes. It justifies different treatment of the non-preferred pilots.
2) Pilots are hired at the non-preferred airlines and paid non preferred wages in exchange for the promise of a real job someday. As exemplified at United, Delta, American, Continental, Alaska and US Air - the "real" jobs might not be there to reward the years of non preferred status.
3) A flow though still would have had provisions to place military pilots at the head of the list. It was a priority to the Delta MEC leadership to have a method for squadron buddies to avoid the non-preferred jobs.
4) Scope still would have been used as a tool to limit "non preferred" airplanes. The difference between JetBlue's aircraft order book and Delta's is the direct result of ALPA bargaining and most everyone agrees, JetBlue's E170/190 platform is the aircraft preferred by customers.
5) Scope was not used as a way to limit outsourcing - ALPA did not and still does not seem to care about "non preferred" members' jobs.

The better solution was OneList. All Delta flying done by Delta pilots.

Of course, Contract 2000 looks like it will result in no Delta flying done by anyone....

~~~^~~~