Informational Stapling Compass to Delta Website

[ACL65PILOT]

Amen.

To echo what the previous two posters have said. Protecting our representational structure is job one. Two is moving forward with the CPZ issues.
As FIN states this could in effect be a step in the correct direction.

Now we need people to show up next Friday. This is a must. If you are off, be there. This depends on your support. I know I will be there.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Fins... you make good points. HOWEVER, it's easier said than done by saying in essence 'we don't speak for you, like we do for CPZ, so if you want it... you gotta come and get it' The reason we (XJ, OH etc...) can't come and get it, is because our sole existence is tied to your contract. When we have no control, it's like telling a chained up dog to go run after the bone.

I think the greatest aspiration of a regional pilot is not to work at mainline for the pay, work rules and BJS (big jet syndrome). That's all the bonus stuff. It's to be apart of a pilot group that doesn't exist as language in somebody elses section 1. And as long as that is the reality in a regional pilots career, we will never have the leverage and ability to make anything happen. All we can control is the fight within our own mgmt as we're thrown the scraps from mainline. The control, like it or not, has to come from mainline.

That appears to be what's happening here with CPZ, but a lot of the reasoning is scary, insulting and simply not trustable. I simply don't trust that this is just the first step. If the 76 jets are worthy... then all the DCI seats should be worthy... all the way to the Saab 340. Brand scope is the answer.

Man, read up on the Ford-Cooksey settlement. That in effect will create a lot of headaches. If you understand that, and the procedure in place because of the settlement, you will understand the reasoning behind the thrust of this resolution.

You CRJ-900 is worthy, but before you build a house you need to make sure the foundation can support it.

 

[~~~^~~~]

That appears to be what's happening here with CPZ, but a lot of the reasoning is scary, insulting and simply not trustable. I simply don't trust that this is just the first step. If the 76 jets are worthy... then all the DCI seats should be worthy... all the way to the Saab 340. Brand scope is the answer.

Why is it scary? Usually each seniority list has its own MEC. Some say the answer is separate MEC's, others say the answer is one list.

One list is less scary than the alternative of another alter ego to flight with, isn't it? Seems like this effort would make most people sleep better at night.

 

[flap operator]

Does there always have to be a "fight?" Does it really scare DALPA, if Compass had their own MEC? They'd have their own voice to act on things that benefit their pilot group. I'm not taking a position either way with CPZ spinning off into their own MEC... just asking the question. If the did, they'd truly have a voice. It doesn't necessarily have to be an adversarial relationship... look at XJ and NWA.

Airlink/DCI and mainline coexist because of mainline scope. If BOTH sides can work together with everyones and not just a few pilots best interests at hand, we'd actually be a UNION, not an association.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Each MEC looks out for their own first.

It's a union, but that term applies moreso to within each MEC as opposed to between MECs. Changing that actuality is why it will be a fight.

This is why you need to write/call (and implore your pilot group to do the same) if you truly want brand scope. Only when we have the same goals can this on a large scale go forward.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Does there always have to be a "fight?" Does it really scare DALPA, if Compass had their own MEC? They'd have their own voice to act on things that benefit their pilot group. I'm not taking a position either way with CPZ spinning off into their own MEC... just asking the question. If the did, they'd truly have a voice. It doesn't necessarily have to be an adversarial relationship... look at XJ and NWA.

Airlink/DCI and mainline coexist because of mainline scope. If BOTH sides can work together with everyone's and not just a few pilots best interests at hand, we'd actually be a UNION, not an association.

IMHO this has your best interests in mind. These CPZ pilots knew what the organizational structure and opportunities were prior to going there. Most went there for the flow. The large majority of them want to keep the MEC structure the way that it is, I know I have asked many of them .They see the issues and single mindedness of splitting them off. It is not to hard to see that.
To change the minds of many you need to first change one person's mind. That is the goal.
If we do the research and it is better to keep CPZ separate and spin them off then the number will prove it. We just want to make darn for certain before any changes are made.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Each MEC looks out for their own first.

It's a union, but that term applies moreso to within each MEC as opposed to between MECs. Changing that actuality is why it will be a fight.

This is why you need to write/call (and implore your pilot group to do the same) if you truly want brand scope. Only when we have the same goals can this on a large scale go forward.

Also remember that once you start flying for multiple carriers it gets a lot harder to pull you back in.

 

[Fly4hire]

Does there always have to be a "fight?" Does it really scare DALPA, if Compass had their own MEC? They'd have their own voice to act on things that benefit their pilot group. I'm not taking a position either way with CPZ spinning off into their own MEC... just asking the question. If the did, they'd truly have a voice. It doesn't necessarily have to be an adversarial relationship... look at XJ and NWA.

Airlink/DCI and mainline coexist because of mainline scope. If BOTH sides can work together with everyones and not just a few pilots best interests at hand, we'd actually be a UNION, not an association.

Yes, however it is important to understand the nature of CPZ.

This was not a new carrier started to offer jobs to pilots off the street - it was a fallback position taken under extreme duress by the NWA pilots during BK to

PROVIDE JOBS FOR NWA PILOTS IN THE EVENT OF A FURLOUGH - nothing else - the **temporary jobs** created are a side benefit that came with ensuring that job protection for NWA, now DAL pilots.

The reason they are on our MEC, and we wrote their contract was because we fully expected a furlough and our pilots to be working there.

All this talk of CPZ and their rights is specious BS - they have no rights other than to be a place holder for possible DAL furloughs - the bilateral flow was the quid they got for being in this tenuous position, and all accepted employment there knowing the landscape.

Letting CPZ have their own MEC would be analogous to having your house robbed at gun point in exchange for your life, and then saying they have squatters rights to your possessions and you will agree to sit down to negotiate the rights to your property.

Having them cut would be acknowledging they have rights to your property. If the DAL MEC gives this away and compromises the only real furlough protection that exists for DAL pilots it will be the greatest surrender in the history of ALPA.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Yes, however it is important to understand the nature of CPZ. This was not a new carrier started to offer jobs to pilots off the street - it was a fallback position taken by the NWA pilots during BK to PROVIDE JOBS FOR NWA PILOTS IN THE EVENT OF A FURLOUGH - nothing else - the temporary jobs created are a side benefit that came with ensuring that job protection for NWA, now DAL pilots.

The reason they are on our MEC, and we wrote their contract was because we fully expected a furlough and out pilots to be working there.

All this talk of CPZ and their rights is specious BS - they have no rights other than to be a place holder for possible DAL furloughs - the bilateral flow was the quid they got for being in this tenuous position, and all accepted employment there knowing the landscape.

Letting CPZ have their own MEC would be analogous to having your house robbed at gun point in exchange for your life, and then saying they have squatters rights to your possessions and you will agree to sit down to negotiate the rights to your property.

Having the DAL MEC cut them lose would be acknowledging they have rights to your property.

Well put. Add to that the possible issues created by an action such as that.

 

[Scope out RJ's]

Man, read up on the Ford-Cooksey settlement. That in effect will create a lot of headaches.

Not really. They'll get the memo.
The only headache for them was the $$ lost by hard working DCI pilots who were promised $$millions in settlements by the failed leadership of the rjdc

 

[andyd]

Do we have to go to our own lec meetings or are we allowed to attend one in the city where we live? I'm lax based but live in Sea...

 

[ACL65PILOT]

you can attend but I do not think that you can vote.

 

[FDJ2]

Do we have to go to our own lec meetings or are we allowed to attend one in the city where we live? I'm lax based but live in Sea...

You don't have to be a member of the LEC where you're based. You can call the MEC Secretary and have your LEC changed to one closer to your domicile.

 

[flyboyike]

I think the greatest aspiration of a regional pilot is not to work at mainline for the pay, work rules and BJS (big jet syndrome). That's all the bonus stuff. It's to be apart of a pilot group that doesn't exist as language in somebody elses section 1.

Amen and a half!

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Well Air France is in DAL's section 1 as I am sure Delta is in theirs.

I know what you are saying though.