Mesa and Delta...It's official

[letthebigdogeat]

Why was he banned?

Ask the moderator Ifly4food, who I believe banned Inclusive Scope. I don't know the exact reason.

Surplus1 - A big thank you from me as well.

 

[uba757]

Surplus thanks for helping me understand what RJDC is all about.UBA757

 

[PCL_128]

Surplus, although I disagree with pretty much everything you said , I still respect the fact that you answered the questions. Thanks for taking the time.

 

[FDJ2]

Surplus, thanks for sharing your interpretation on the litigation and the law.

I take it that you believe that CMR or any other ALPA carrier should be allowed to fly unlimited DL code on the 777 if it wins an RFP for that flying, so long as that 777 is on their certificate.

Do you think this will increase RFPs and the whipsaw or decrease it?

 

[FDJ2]

Surplus thanks for helping me understand what RJDC is all about.UBA757

Do you like what you hear?

 

[uba757]

FDJ2, I hope that we can find a way for CMR and ASA to prossper under the Delta umbrella without taking jobs away from the mainline pilots or bringing down your pay scales. That would also mean for all of the Delta flying to be performed by Delta mainline and its wholly owned subsidiaries CMR/ASA only. This is the first time that I have been able to read something that kind of describes what the RJDC is about. Again I have to read some more to make an educated decision to see if I agree with the RJDC or not. What do you think about the explanation given by Surplus? What points do you agree? And which points do you not agree with.

I dont think that as a Comair pilot I or any other Comair pilot or ASA pilot should ever have the right to bid flying on Delta mainline unless we leave CMR or ASA and become Delta mainline pilots. I dont know if that answers your question or not. I hope it does. The few people that I have talked to at CMR about the RJDC tell me that it is not suit agains Delta mainline but a suit against ALPA'S way of doing business. Again I need to educate myself on what it really is before I can make an educated decission on my support or lack of for the RJDC. UBA757

 

[FDJ2]

FDJ2, What do you think about the explanation given by Surplus? What points do you agree? And which points do you not agree with.

Uba, I think Surplus laid out what he believes to be a) what the RJDC litigation seeks by way of a court ordered injunction against certain scope clause protections b) what he believes to be the law of the land, c) where he believes he was wronged. I was actually only looking for his take on "a".

For the most part I agree with his take on "a", and that is basically what I have been saying all along. The RJDC does not believe that any pilot group can have scope over the code their airline uses, only the aircraft. Of course having scope over the aircraft and not the code is about as usefull as tits on a bull. You need both. In the RJDC world all flying can ultimately be put up for bid to the lowest bidder. It does not matter whether you are wholly owned or not. As an example, Delta could give Mesa the 777 contract to Narita, Japan, so long as that flying was not done on a Delta aircraft, CMR could order a bunch of B737s and start flying the Delta Shuttle, American Eagle could get some B757 and take over the Song flights out of JFK. If the Delta pilots wanted to fly some of the Delta code they would have to underbid the other competing pilot groups to get a slice of the action.

As far as "b" and "c" are concerned, I think he is dead wrong on many points. However, it was never my intention to debate the merits or law involved in this litigation when I asked the questions, I just wanted to confirm the agenda.

 

[FDJ2]

Condensed answers offered by an RJDC supporter of what the RJDC seeks.

8 Simple Questions for the RJDC
Simple questions Braveheart refused to answer

1. Can the DAL pilot group, or any pilot group own/control their code?


No.

2. If you can't control (own) the code, then how can you prevent
outsourcing?


You can not control your code, only your aircraft. Companies would be allowed to outsource flying to the lowest bidder so long as they use their own aircraft.


3. According to the RJDC lawsuit, can ALPA negotiate scope language for the DAL pilots that limits another ALPA pilot group access to the DL code regardless of wholly owned status?


No.


4. According to the RJDC, does CMR/ASA being wholly owned or not have any effect on the RJDC lawsuit? If so, what does it change?


Wholly owned status is not relevant to the RJDC litigation.


5. According to the RJDC lawsuit, would ALPA be allowed to negotiate scope limits on the DL code which would prevent another ALPA pilot group from flying DL code passengers on 90 seat, 110 seat or 150 seat aircraft?


No, there can be no size limitations


6. If the RJDC lawsuit were to prevail, would a combined DAL/ASA PWA be able to apply DL code scope restrictions on CMR if CMR were a wholly owned or spun off? How about scope restrictions limiting DL code access to Mesa or Freedom?


There can be no limitations placed on the outsourcing of the DL code, so long as it is outsourced to another ALPA pilot group, such as Mesa.

7. Explain the following from your lawsuit and how it prevents whipsawing and outsourcing:

"Plaintiffs thus seek an injunction ordering ALPA to stop negotiating or assisting in the negotiation of scope clauses in such a manner as to exercise control over the flying by pilots for a carrier other than the one for which the CBA is being negotiated"


It doesn’t prevent whipsawing.


8. Is there any claim for relief in the RJDC lawsuit which would compel a single list or PWA? If so, which one?


There is nothing in the RJDC litigation that would compel a single list or PWA.

 

[~~~^~~~]

FDJ2 :

I sincerely hope someone is paying you for your crusade. I do not understand how anyone could be on the apartied side of a "union."

When we get to our next airline, after Delta, I hope you can this crap and understand that perfect scope is when all flying is done by an airline is performed by pilots on the list. No subcontracting.

I also hope you understand that pilots at airlines like ASA and Comair are not naked aboriginies who sacrifice employment rights on the altar of the scope God, praying for codeshare. We are also not a sub-human group of employees who do not deserve representation, and we are not slaves to work the fields, bringing in the harvest for the Masters of the house.

Our representational struggle is not unlike any representational struggle in history. Also note that in recorded history, the oppressed have always won against their opressors. It may take 500 years, or another 10 years in the case of the RJDC lawsuit, but how long it takes really does not matter. What does matter is what is "right." ALPA itself is on a path towards destruction because it has completely lost its founding principle of unity.

Most of the airlines that will be here in 10 years are not ALPA. I very seriously doubt they will vote to become ALPA. Could you blame them?

Oh, and since this thread is about another of ALPA's failures, to stay on topic - whipsaw $ucks.

~~~^~~~

 

[FDJ2]

FDJ2 :


Oh, and since this thread is about another of ALPA's failures, to stay on topic - whipsaw $ucks.

~~~^~~~

Fins, when asked how the RJDC litigation would prevent whipsaw, this is the answer I got.

It would not prevent whipsawing and that is not the purpose of the litigation.

So don't muddy the issue. Do not pretend to interject an anti-whipsaw agenda into anything related to the RJDC. The RJDC agenda, as demonstrated in their lawsuit, is to increase the whipsaw. Do not pretend for one second, that an RJDC victory would do anything other then increase whipsawing. That's what it is all ultimately all about.

Fins, did you notice how different your answers were from those of Surplus on nearly all the questions.