Response to JoeMerchant

[FDJ2]

[/color][/size][/font]

Your work is flying whatever DAL operates on the DAL certificate and nothing else.

Wrong again Surplus, but that's no surprise. Even you should know that the scope of DAL pilot flying is defined in section 1 of the DAL PWA. The same is true for CMR. It has nothing to do with what aircraft DAL operates or has on its certificate. If the PWA stated that Delta pilots would fly KAL 747s that have DL code on them, for example, then that would be DAL pilot flying, so long as it was ok with KAL of course. Likewise, if our PWA allowed KAL pilots to fly DAL 757s, even though they were on our certificate and under the operational control of DAL, that wouldn't be "our work." Section 1 defines the work, not the standards you conjure up out of thin air, such as only "whatever DAL operates on the DAL certificate and nothing else." One day you'll learn the difference.


You opened the barn door and the horse is gone.

Horses can be rounded up and barn doors closed.

Live with it.

I can live with what we negotiate with our employer, you're the one with the problem and the endless, going no where lawsuit.


The company owns its code and its flying. They give you what part of it they want to give you and nothing else.

We get what we negotiate. It's all part of the collective bargaining process.


The outsourcing you created is here to stay as long as the company wants it to stay. If they really want more they will get more. If you don't like it you have one option; strike. You are free to make that decision in every Section 6; have at it.

So you agree that if we want to close the barn door we could, and that would be legal if both DAL and the DAL pilots agreed to it, since as you say, "we are free to make that decision. Great Surplus, we have common ground, I can negotiate whatever I can with my employer.


When the ALPA decides to stop interfering with the collective bargaining process for the purpose of furthering your ambitions at our expense, then that will be fine; not before.

I have no problem with the CMR PWA or colective bargaining process, I'm not the one with the lawsuit. The CMR pilots have ratified everyone of their contracts, not the Delta pilots. The fact that their previous MEC leadership failed them miserably and left them with no job protections in the event of an acquisition is not my fault, but rather the fault of the weak and short sighted MEC that negotiated their PWA prior to their acquisition.

Hopefully, the courts will require the ALPA to represent fairly. IF they do, at that point you can make good on your threat to leave the ALPA.

We won't have to leave ALPA, since the RJDC lawsuit is failing miserably and can't even make its way out of discovery three years after 90% of the RJDC's baseless claims were summarily rejected and the discovery process started. What do they need to discover, the language in the PWA is a matter of public record? If they had a claim they could back up, they would have moved forward by now, but they don't.

 

[ReportCanoa]

Why can't you admit that APA and ALPA FUBARed the career by allowing jets to be flown by regionals. FUBAR- Do you know what that means?

 

[PCL_128]

Why can't you admit that APA and ALPA FUBARed the career by allowing jets to be flown by regionals. FUBAR- Do you know what that means?

I'll admit that, but that has nothing to do with this silly little lawsuit.

 

[ReportCanoa]

I'll admit that, but that has nothing to do with this silly little lawsuit.

Well, it kind of does. Scope has failed the legacy pilots, and to an even more pathetic extent, it has failed the regional pilots. It would be better if we worked together, but that is completely lost on ALPA and its roll-call majority. Its an ego thing, and there's no accounting for that, as we all know.

 

[PCL_128]

Well, it kind of does. Scope has failed the legacy pilots, and to an even more pathetic extent, it has failed the regional pilots. It would be better if we worked together, but that is completely lost on ALPA and its roll-call majority. Its an ego thing, and there's no accounting for that, as we all know.

The problem isn't that scope failed the legacy pilots, the problem is that the legacy pilots gave away all of their scope. Just look at General Lee. A few days before the TA was released, all he could talk about was how he would vote down any TA that contained scope concessions. What actually happened? He voted for a TA that allowed further erosion of his contract's scope language in a sad attempt to hold onto a few bucks an hour and a work-rule here and there. Even after all these years of outsourcing, the General and his legacy buddies still don't understand that all the pay and work rules in the world don't help when your flying is being done by another pilot group. That's the real problem.

This isn't really the fault of the national Association. It's ultimately the fault of the individual MECs and pilot groups.

 

[FDJ2]

The problem isn't that scope failed the legacy pilots, the problem is that the legacy pilots gave away all of their scope.

ALL? A bit of a stretch there don't you think? I agree that we have relaxed our scope too much and allowed too much of our code to be flown in larger gauge aircraft, but don't forget that still is only ~ 15-18% of ASMs, not all.

BTW, I voted no, but I respect the bargaining process and accept the decision of the majority of DAL pilots. It is after all the DAL Pilots Working Agreement, not FDJ2s.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I recall in the late 90's when everryone was hiring..... We didn't even need Mr Roarke to say... SMILES! Everyone SMILES!!!

 

[PCL_128]

I agree that we have relaxed our scope too much and allowed too much of our code to be flown in larger gauge aircraft, but don't forget that still is only ~ 15-18% of ASMs, not all.

True, but ASMs do not create pilot jobs; block hours do. If I remember correctly, about 49% of DAL block-hours are flown by DCI carriers. That's roughly half of all Delta's flying being done by outsourced pilots. That's one heck of a lot of jobs!

I don't mean to blame the entire pilot group, because you're certainly right that many pilots did vote no. However, we all need to understand what the real problem is here: outsourcing of mainline jobs. The RJDC is fighting on the wrong side of this issue, and that's really my main point.

 

[rtmcfi]

The problem isn't that scope failed the legacy pilots, the problem is that the legacy pilots gave away all of their scope. Just look at General Lee. A few days before the TA was released, all he could talk about was how he would vote down any TA that contained scope concessions. What actually happened? He voted for a TA that allowed further erosion of his contract's scope language in a sad attempt to hold onto a few bucks an hour and a work-rule here and there. Even after all these years of outsourcing, the General and his legacy buddies still don't understand that all the pay and work rules in the world don't help when your flying is being done by another pilot group. That's the real problem.

This isn't really the fault of the national Association. It's ultimately the fault of the individual MECs and pilot groups.

I think I am going to be sick. As much as I have raked PCL over the coals for his past transgressions, he is dead-on balls accurate on this. It pains me to say this, but I could not possibly agree with him more. Well said PCL......

 

[ReportCanoa]

This isn't really the fault of the national Association. It's ultimately the fault of the individual MECs and pilot groups.

Um, I'm gonna disagree here. If MEC's were signing away scope, why didn't national step in? There has to be accountability in the ranks, but when every MEC is doing what suits it best at the expense of the career, there needs to be a higher power to intervene.

I vote for an overhaul of ALPA. I mean, the sticker says "one union, one mission...".