LOA 83 Accelerated Small Jets

[surplus1]

Two Sides To The Story

To typhoonpilot, et al,

Yes, there are two sides to the story and both sides should be heard.

Like many other things in life, there is often a significant difference between what you do and how and why you do it. You have focused on the what, while completely ignoring the how and why. The what (wanting access to the new jobs) is not offensive, the how and why (Jets for Jobs) IS offensive. In other words, the method chosen by ALPA and the UMEC is the reason for the objections. The majority of ALL of us, self included, would like the see the furloughed pilots get recalled or get new jobs. What is unacceptable is how you're going about it.

It is unbelievable how some people think it is okay for the regional airlines to be handed former major airline flying and then think it isn't okay that the displaced pilots be left jobless.

That statement proves the point that I am and was trying to make. First of all, regional airlines are not being "handed former major airline flying". That misconception lies at the root of the the division than now exists and unfortunately, continues to be fostered by the ALPA decision makers.

Management is simply shifting from the utilization of currently inefficient and unprofitable mainline aircraft to the use of equipment that is currently more suitable to the present economic environment. That these different types of equipment, often owned and operated by the same corporate entity, are being flown by different and disparate pilot groups, with a common employer is a direct result of the behavior of the union and the mainline pilot groups. YOU ALL created this mess by virtue of the discriminatory and apartheid practices of mainline pilot leaders. Additionally, your current activies exacerbate the problem of outsourcing rather than reducing it.

In general, regional pilots may regret and resent the mistakes of the past but do not want to hold you "hostage" because of them. The problem is that your groups want to continue the same flawed policies, i.e., you refuse to change, even to your own detriment and potential demise.

Only the selfish and greedy can think it is okay to accept another airlines routes without employing some of the displaced pilots. In this case, 14 year USAirways veterans.
Typhoonpilot

Again, your statement demonstrates that you do not understand the real problem. The fact is we would ALL like to employ not some, but ALL of the "displaced" mainline pilots. What we do NOT want is to have this happen by the forced abrogation of seniority and contracts at the hiring carriers. Forced, not by management, but by the very union that allegedly represents ALL our collective interests. Yes, there are 14-year US Airways "veterans" that have been furloughed. That's extremely regrettable. However, it does NOT justify the displacement of 15-year ALG and PDT "veterans" (or any other pilot no matter how senior or junior) to ensure their re-employment. Neither does it justify the dileberate proliferation of outsourcing.

That you choose to classify objection to your policies "selfish and greedy" on the part of regional pilots reminds me of the current dilemma of Trent Lott ..... you just don't get it!

I don't want you to reverse the errors of the past. That's not possible. However, neither do I want you to continue the same stupid separatist policies that created them. That is precisely what ALPA's "Jets for Jobs" protocol attempts to do. That's bad policy, bad politics, bad faith and discriminatory. It should be rejected without exception. You can't run a "union" on the basis of a policy of disunity and segragation of airline pilots. That's ludicrous.

I encourage you and others that support this policy to stop trying before we get to the point of no return. I would like to be your brother; don't force me to become your enemy. Either you modify your thinking or the chasm will become an unbridgeable abyss.

 

[csmith]

Re: Two Sides To The Story

From Goldentrout:

I've heard two different sources tell me that Leo M. has been talking to his Capt iupgrade classes, and he says all aircraft under 110 seats or so will be flown by Comair/ASA.

I have several hundred pages that say something else. So now the wild rumor is up to 110, huh? LOL


From Surplus:

I encourage you and others that support this policy to stop trying before we get to the point of no return. I would like to be your brother; don't force me to become your enemy. Either you modify your thinking or the chasm will become an unbridgeable abyss.

Message received loud and clear. Thanks for the threat Usama.

C

really thinks Surplus might go and..uh...visit ALPA national hdq.

 

[goldentrout]

CSMITH

As I said, it's just rumors about 110 seat aircraft.

If you know something different, let's hear it.

As for your optimism about the future of the DAL list, I applaud you for having hope.

However, for your plan to come together, it will only happen if

the economy does rebound in the mid decade

and if

Congress doesn't raise the retirement age

and if

the business travel picks up to what were record setting levels of the late nineties

and if

fractional jets don't siphon off much of the business travel

and if

businesses are willing to pay for fares twice to three times as much as those offered by the low cost carriers

and if

the DAL low cost program makes some money

and if

management at DAL doesn't decide to start a Delta version of Mid-Atlantic to avoid having to pay mainline pilot rates

and if

the RJDC doesn't win it's case, which just might void all your scope clauses

If I were you, I think I'd go with the 70/90 seat RJ mainline option. If traffic does pick up, then they'll always be bigger iron to fly at DAL mainline, and hiring to help you move up in seniority.

If all the "ifs" above don't materialize, you and your fellow furloughees might be "preserving the profession" a little longer than you expected.

It's not your flying, it's not Comair flying, it's not ASA flying, it's not ACA flying, it's not Skywest flying.

It's the Delta Corporation's flying...they have a plethora of aircraft with which to do this flying. It is management's responsiblity to use the right sized plane on the right route to maximize revenue.

See...if we were all one list...and we had just a one line scope clause that said "all Delta flying will be done by a pilot on the Delta seniorty list," all these problems would disappear.

If we had one list...few if any DAL pilots would be on furlough...they might be flying RJs for a few years until the industry downturn ended, but they'd have a job, and might even have a few people being hired below them.

Instead, ALPA has convinced you, apparently, to "take one for the team."

I hope you're a good craps player...because THEIR current "preserve the profession" strategy sure is
a big roll of the dice with YOUR future.

 

[csmith]

As I said, Golden, this has been debated ad nauseum on the ALPA boards--where it should be. I don't agree that it is reasonable to obtain one list. I don't agree that Congress will raise the age with this many pilots out of work. I do agree that there COULD be some sort of MidAtlantic agreement at Delta. I don't agree that the Delta pilots do not own/control who flies airplanes for Delta. We could go on and on with debate, but it's already been done ad nauseum on the Nat'l boards.

My original post wanted to clear up the misconception that there had never been a flow through offered. If I were you, I would have pushed for it because there will likely be a very loud thud when this RJDC thing hits the ground.

C

 

[goldentrout]

CSMITH

OK...you win. You're right . It's all DAL flying, and the RJDC is screwed up.

You and your MEC can stand by your position until the cows come home, while

1. ASA/Comair continue to hire, to the tune of 500 pilots or so next year, and acquire another 30 or 40 jets, including 70 seaters.

2. Watch more of your guys go on furlough every month.

3. Live with the prospect that Mid Atlantic II or Freedom Air II could spoil your whole plan.

4. Watch DAL management farm out even more flying to ACA/Chatauqua and who knows who else.

5. Hope this DAL low cost thing works...otherwise, it will be even more money down the drain.

6. Hope, against all prognostications, that low cost carriers don't continue to gain even more market share (i.e. more business travel too), so that revenue levels return enough to sustain your compensation at DAL mainline.

You know, we're all (well, most of us), are on your side.

As you said, though, this has been debated to the death...only time will tell if ALPA really is going to "preserve the profession."

Ai I said, I hope for YOUR sake, THEIR strategy works...because in my opinion, ALPA's compensation strategy has lately been take care of the top of the last, and to heck with everything and everyone else.

Good Luck...I really do hope yo're flying again soon. I was furloughed once, I know it stinks.

 

[surplus1]

From Surplus:

Message received loud and clear. Thanks for the threat Usama.

C really thinks Surplus might go and..uh...visit ALPA national hdq.

That type of rhetoric merely illustrates the absence of intellect that pervades your thought process.

Pitiful. -- adj. 1. Arousing or deserving of pity; pathetic. 2. So inferior or insignificant as to be contemptible; mean; paltry; despicable.

 

[csmith]

That type of rhetoric merely illustrates the absence of intellect that pervades your thought process.

Pitiful. -- adj. 1. Arousing or deserving of pity; pathetic. 2. So inferior or insignificant as to be contemptible; mean; paltry; despicable.

Yeah, kind of like comparing the Delta MEC and ALPA to the situation of Trent Lott. Don't throw stones..............

C

thinks the pitiful finger should be pointed right back at S