RJ Vs. Alpa

[Traumahawk]

So what you're saying is.......

I'm still a couple years away from the regional level...more college left. But I know several people flying for both majors and regionals and unfortunately, the honest message people in my position get towards the ever changing status and direction of the Industry we dream about getting into everyday is this:

Example: United used to have flights that never changed for 5-6 years. But now, when a passenger walks up to the gate with his $350 ticket and looks out the window for that towering 757, he'll see an RJ. And, another one an hour later and maybe another a few hours later. There are places like ATL, CLE, MSP which within a couple months will have nothing but United Express RJ's, no mainline jets. What happened to what airline travel is all about??? Flying on large airplanes over large distances with great service(yes, lately this leaves much to be desired) But cmon. I thought regional airlines were here to bring people from Athens, GA to ATL so they could fly a longer distance on a mainline flight. It's the nature of the job...or what it used to be.
I have nothing against regional pilots. Often the same bang, just for less buck(at this point) Great guys...I hope to be one soon. And I think a lot of them would be lying if they said they didn't dream of flying for a Major Airline, flying large equipment, having gone though the motions, gone through the right's of passage, and finally settling down with a prestigious, fun, enjoyable career with excellent benefits and pay. Sometimes I look at whats going on, and as excited as I will be to start climbing the ladder and building 121 experience as a regional pilot, sometimes I think when I jumpseat on a mainline flight(if theres still some left), I oughta come up with the cash amount of that flight's ticket fare, divide it between the 2 guys up front and say, "hey guys, this is for you. because later today, I'm going to fly the routes you should be flying on." For those trying to get to that point, it seemingly involves involuntarily screwing people who paid their dues already. Thats not right.

I mean, just from a consumer standpoint, the Airline Industry looks like it is on the road to become a low wage, cheaply run taxi service. Darn, missed the 5 o'clock, eh, there will be another one in 20 minutes. But I'm still often paying the full(if not more)fare that I payed for that spankin' new 767-400 with nice big chairs, more than 1 flight attendant etc.....

Again, I'm new to this, I don't have a side. It isn't my present focus nor anything I can do anything about. Don't hate me for it, but this is what it looks like to us bystanders....TPA-ORD is Hardly United Express, it's UNITED AIRLINES. Express...lets think about that word. Regional is another one to think about.

--T-hawk

 

[Freight Dog]

Well that's what I'm trying to say Traumahawk, "regional" affiliates have absolutely no business flying across the country in "regional" jets. ALPA is right... they are "small jets."
ORD-TPA as United Express... yeah really. Or CVG-HOU as Delta Connection. Reeeeheeheheheheheheeeeeeally!!

I mean come on surplus... first of all, there are no more furloughed Aloha pilots, the last were recalled 2 months ago. Secondly, NO, they should NOT be given my flying. I fly a 37 passenger turboprop. They fly a 124 passenger jet. Their second year FO pay is more than our most senior captain pay. That's how it should be.

Your argument of RJ's instead of 737's... well explain this to me.
Why is it that when I went IAH-BNA in the morning I flew on a B737 on Continental and an hour prior, I had just missed a COEX RJ flying there? Market doesn't support it? Hardly... the answer is: cheap labor.

You mentioned Aloha. As you know, this is a limited market. There are only so many airports to be served. Aloha serves HNL, LIH, OGG, KOA, ITO, and is the only carrier that can fly direct between these airports under AQ code. We fly under AQ code. But we cannot fly direct between those airports due to scope clause, we have to make a stop. That's how I think you should be scoped, or something to that extent. Flying across the country, overflying the hubs and taking over routes from the mainline should be prevented. I don't mind expansion as long as it doesn't take away from the mainline, or inhibits mainline expansion.

Also, one thing that neither SDD, nor you Surplus, have mentioned is if RJDC lawsuit is filed also against Delta management? I mean, they've signed DALPA's contract, they're the ones opposed to merging you into one list - even if DALPA opposed it, if management wanted it... you'd be merged.
It's kinda like your lawsuit which I think it's ridiculous and the things you're asking for. As SDD stated that no one gets what they want in a lawsuit, that's why you pile things on. So now if DALPA went on a rant about RJ's and wanted to scope COMASA out of existence, and the management agreed on it... whose fault is it? Who runs the joint?? DALPA or the management??

This whole RJDC is a joke... you guys are fighting DALPA while the management uses Skywest and Chautauqua (non-ALPA carriers) and giving your flying away. Whipsaw at its best.

Your entire fight is grossly misdirected...


Aloha!

 

[~~~^~~~]

Well that's what I'm trying to say Traumahawk, "regional" affiliates have absolutely no business flying across the country in "regional" jets. ALPA is right... they are "small jets."

I think he is finally starting to understand part of the story. Regional Jets, also known as small jets, are simply smaller units of capacity for mainline carriers. Based on the capabilities of the aircraft it should be operated by mainline. The same folks who now lead the RJDC tried to get ALPA to bring us together - which would make the small jets part of mainline. One list = one airline.

Also, one thing that neither SDD, nor you Surplus, have mentioned is if RJDC lawsuit is filed also against Delta management?

No Delta was not sued. Delta does not owe their pilots a "duty of fair representation." I pay ALPA to represent me. Right now my attorney in fact (ALPA) is fighting desperately to (1) keep our operations separate from Delta mainline, (2) stop as much of my flying as possible and (3) put me on the street. Obviously ALPA has failed in their legal duty to represent Connection pilots fairly and ALPA will be held responsible for their predatory actions.

You are correct that we should be fighting for better wages and working conditions with management, but right now ALPA is trying to put us out of work. There is not much reason to fight for better wages when you do not have a job. Further, a Captain upgrade nearly doubles a first officer's pay - growth is important.

I would love nothing more than to heal this civil war within ALPA. However, as long as ALPA tries to keep in an apartied system we will fight for the kind of union provided by the laws of our Nation and ALPA's own Constitution and Bylaws.

Regards,
~~~^~~~

 

[Freight Dog]

Still.. it's a misfired lawsuit. You should be suing the management, not DALPA. So, you sued ALPA for some ungodly amount, and if by some miracle you win, you'll expect to cash it in.

Per SDD's post... you fire things away and whatever hits... you scored.

Well, so now what's really the difference between DALPA firing away at say, running COMASA out of existence by scoping yas to death and RJDC suing ALPA for millions and millions of dollars?!

In my view, the management signed and endorsed DALPA's contract. They have nothing to do with RJDC. So you're suing the wrong people.. not to mention your agenda is plain wrong IMHO.

 

[skydiverdriver]

Freight dog,
How can we sue Delta, when they didn't do anything wrong? Our union is the one that didn't follow the law, or their own rules. We are suing the correct party.

Tramahawk,
Those people who you say are paying full fare and getting on an rj are getting exactly what they asked for. Just ask any passenger what their first priority was when purchasing their ticket, and they will say price. The airlines are catering to their wishes by eliminating meals and useless seats on flights that cannot support them. It is true that you could have a large jet and a small jet on the same route at different times. Well, have you ever seen a traffic jam at 2am? It's because there are peak times for travel, and that is what the airline is catering to.

 

[surplus1]

Freight Dog,

I don't mind your difference of opinion or disagreement with me, the RJDC or anyone else. However, it is extremely difficult to debate with you when your "scope" does not include understanding of the core issues.

Please read some of FDJs posts in this and other threads. There is much disagreement between he and I, but he does understand the issues. That makes it possible for us to debate. I don't mean to offend you but you're so far off the core that meaningful debate is extremely difficult.

Still.. it's a misfired lawsuit. You should be suing the management, not DALPA. So, you sued ALPA for some ungodly amount, and if by some miracle you win, you'll expect to cash it in.

How can we debate the merits of our suit or the lack of merit when you can't even figure out who we're suing or why?

We are not suing "DALPA". In the first place, there is no such thing as DALPA. That's a misplaced acronym, invented by Delta pilots, to describe what they might like to become. DALPA does not exist.

There is a Delta MEC (DMEC), an internal unit of the ALPA, made up of Delta pilots elected to represent their peers, within the ALPA. It is not a legal entity an cannot be sued. It is not independent and cannot enter into legal contracts with anyone. The Delta pilot's exclusive bargaining agent is the Air Line Pilots Association, International. It is not DALPA or the DMEC.

The ALPA, is also the exclusive bargaining agent of the Comair pilots and the ASA pilots. There is no "CALPA" or "AALPA". These realities create the inherent conflicts of interest and generate the dispute.

Understanding the ALPA's basic structure is pre-requisite to debating whom should be sued or why. Since you do not appear to understand that structure, it is virtually impossible to debate with you.

The issues surrounding and leading to the litigation are extremely complex. They are only very remotely related to your aspirations of employment at a "major" airline or my reitrement from a regional airline. They involve the intricacies of the Railway Labor Act, the Federal laws and regulations eminating therefrom and the ALPA's Duty of Fair Representation, explit in those laws and regulations.

A modicum of familiarity with the RLA, the Federal rules, the NMB and the permissable behavior towards its members of a labor union operating under the Act, is essential and pre-requisite to discussion of the litigation's merits or lack thereof.

Unless one has completed Labor Relations 101, 201 and 301, launching into a post-graduate discussion of associated issues is difficult at best. The very same concept applies to ALPA 101,201, etc.,.

It's fine to have opinions about who should fly what and what a Scope clause should say or do. While those things are related to the issues underlying the litigation, they are not the purpose of the litigation. This is an action to enjoin the ALPA from violating its DFR responsibilities under the RLA, and to oblige the ALPA to honor its Constitution and apply its charter, without discrimination or arbitrary decision, equally to all of its members.

Management has an obligation under the law to negotiate with the union. It has no obligation under the law to represent the interests of the members of that union. Therefore, the fact that management signs a contract with the union, that is injurious to some members of the union and favors other members of the union is both permissable and irrelevant.

The obligation to represent its members fairly, to bargain in good faith, to refrain from arbitrary decisions and to not discriminate against its members, is incumbent upon the Union and required of it by law. Therefore, the union (unlike management) acts in violation of its obligations to the individual member, when it negotiates and enters into a contract that injures or descriminates against any of its members in order to favor other members. The union violates the law when it fails to honor its Duty of Fair Representation.

The litigation alleges that the ALPA, which is the only union involved, and which represents the Detla pilots, the Comair pilots and the ASA pilots simultaneously, has violated its Duty of Fair Representation. The litigation further alleges that the violations, if not enjoined, will cause irreperable harm to the litigants themselves and other members of their class. The litigation further asks the courts, if its arguments are held to be sound, to reverse the union's actions or require the union to compensate the injured members for the resultant damages, or both.

That is what this is all about. The job that you may get tomorrow or the one that I may have today are not the issue. They are the by-products of the union's alleged malfeasance.

I don't ask you to agree with the litigation's allegations or its demand for remedy and compensation for alleged injury. I do ask that you make an effort to understand the issues, after which we can argue their merit.

Per SDD's post... you fire things away and whatever hits... you scored.

SDD and I agree about many things. The shotgun approach to litigation remedies isn't one of them. But hey, we can't be perfect.

Well, so now what's really the difference between DALPA firing away at say, running COMASA out of existence by scoping yas to death and RJDC suing ALPA for millions and millions of dollars?!

It happens that the ALPA, in supporting the DMEC, did in fact try to so limit "ComASA" as to threaten to "run it out of existence" and severly damage the careers of CMR/ASA pilots (not at DAL, but within their own airlines) and cause the potential loss of their jobs. The damages sought reflect the hundreds of millions of dollars that CMR and ASA pilots could lose as a result of the ALPA's actions, plus punitive damage to preclude repetition of the offense.

Perhaps the career of a regional pilot has no value to you because you "dream" of something else. I hope your dream comes true. However, to the regional pilot that does not achieve or share that dream, his existing job is worth many millions over the normal span of a pilot's career. The idea or concept that all this can simply be taken away from him by his own labor union (without penalty to the taker) in order to satisfy the desires of another pilot in that union who has been afforded a "preferred" status is not only ludicrous, it may well be criminal. The courts will make that determination.

In my view, the management signed and endorsed DALPA's contract. They have nothing to do with RJDC. So you're suing the wrong people.. not to mention your agenda is plain wrong IMHO.

I really hate to say this but the truth is your "view" is off base. We are suing the only entity that is legally responsible. Our "agenda" is fair representation under the law. What's "wrong" about that? Does your "view" include the thought that there is some higher merit or power vested in mainline pilots and the ALPA which transcends the law? I hope not.

 

[Freight Dog]

You are right, I probably don't understand all this whizbang stuff Delta "politically correct" talk (DALPA, etc.) The fact is you are suing ALPA, which is also MY union, for "damaging your career."

Let's see here... conflict of interests between Delta MEC (being politically correct here) and COMASA ALPA units. Who controls the majority of flying at Delta Airlines Inc and that includes DCI? I'm just curious if it's ASA and Comair or is it Delta mainline? Am I correct to assume that you folks are outnumbered by mainline by something of 2-1 ratio? So even if you had a say in Delta's scope talks... what chance would you have to negate the scope and how would the result be any different if COMASA pilots were included in the vote? Just curious...

Also, SDD... how can you sue Delta? Well, I don't know.. you tell me. RJDC is suing ALPA for negotiating a contract for one of its largest units - Delta. Now, the management signs a contract inclusive of scope you don't like, and now you are pissed at ALPA.

I don't know dude... that's a misfire. DALPA wants to protect jobs for its pilots through scope, the management signs it... you want to force the merger of the lists, the management doesn't want it (it is NOT ALPA's call who merges and who doesn't), and now you are pissed and are suing ALPA.

WAY off-base....


Aloha!

Just another "regional airline" ALPA member.

 

[skydiverdriver]

Sir,
The reason we are suing ALPA is because our $25,000 lawyer told us to. We are going under the direction of the only lawyer that has every beaten ALPA, so I'm sure he knows what he is doing. I'm not a lawyer and can't speak about the law, but I believe what we are doing is right, and that's why I support the rjdc.

If you disagree with what we are doing, fine. But, deciding on who we should litigate against might be better left to the experts. I can admit that I'm not a lawyer, and cannot speak to this issue, can you?

I wish you good luck in whatever happens.

 

[surplus1]

Re: So what you're saying is.......

I'm still a couple years away from the regional level...more college left. But I know several people flying for both majors and regionals and unfortunately, the honest message people in my position get towards the ever changing status and direction of the Industry we dream about getting into everyday is this:

Welcome to the discussion, debate, argument or whatever you want to call it. If your dream is to become an airline pilot, I sincerely hope you realize that dream when you're ready. It's not for everyone, but for those who truly love flying its the greatest thing since mom's apple pie.

Yes, the industry is changing. If you look back through history that is really not inconsistent with the past. Change has always been a part of this business and it will be for the foreseable future. Some of the changes are good others great and still others not so hot for airplane drivers.

Most new pilots ultimately aspire to the day they'll fly "heavy metal", particularly those that want an airline career. Its the natural thing to want to fly the biggest and best equipment. In the corporate world its not too different with most hoping to fly a G-V or a Global Challenger, etc.

In terms of equipment we had a big change when we went to pressurized cabins for airliners an engines with internal superchargers or PRTs. The next really big change was the introduction of the large (for its day) jet transport. The most recent change is of course the introduction of the small jet transport that we call the "regional jet".

Each of these equipment changes revolutionized the industry in their day, much as the RJ is doing today.

Along with the changes in equipment have also come changes in economics and the money that pilots earn. On the down side of that is what I call a change in motivation of airline pilots. Once upon a time, not too long ago, how much money he would ultimately make was the last thing an aspiring pilot thought about. Just getting a job, any job, was a big deal. Not anymore.

Today I see new pilots expecting to be paid $100 grand in their 3rd yr as a pilot in a 50-seat jet and complaining loudly if they can't upgrade to Captain in a year or two. Both absurdities from my perspective.

Not too long ago (depending on what you see as a "long time") back when NE merged with DAL, if I remember correctly the Captain of a ME F-27 earned less than $12.00 per flight hour. Today, we're paying a 2nd yr FO over $100K in a DC-9 or 737.

The FE, once a knowledgable and invaluable member of the flight crew, changed to become a know-little panel switch operator and eventually disappeared or nearly so.

Before "deregulation" airlines didn't really compete with each other, they fought with the CAB for ownership of routes and could easily gouge customers to satisfy the "needs" of pilot's ever-increasing contractual demands. Today, they can't.

Depending on who gives you your "coaching", your perspective on the value of the regional jet, will be very different. If your "friend" is a senior airline Captain, he often doesn't know which little airplane his company may code-share with, how many it may have or what they're really like and, what's more, he doesn't care. If he's that junior co-pilot in and old DC-9, he sees himself as a titan, feels threatened by everything, and often despises the folks that fly the equipment he himself was flying just yesterday. RJs are the enemy if they are operated by his own company, for they won't pay him 100K to respond to the "gear up" command. If they're operated by a subcontractor, they become an obstacle to his "growth" and upgrade in 2 years. After all, if they didn't exist, there would be hundreds more (in his mind) 737s and DC-9s, full of pilots junior to him. There's that upgrade again. He's quite willing to have his company go broke if necessary, as long as he himself is paid more, for doing less and can upgrade in a couple of years. And the wheel turns.

The customer, who pays all our bills, is no longer willing to be told that there's only one (1) flight per day to his airport in Peoria. He want's jets (not an "old" turboprop built last week) and he wants them available when HE wants to fly, not when the airline thinks he should.

Management, for some strange reason, wants to make a profit. The more the better. They want to give the customer the frequency that he prefers and they don't want to fly a 737 anywhere with 35 people in the back. It wont pay the bills, including the $100K salary of the copilot.

They seem to think the Company is a business, with shareholders, who want a return on their investment. They are confused, when pilots don't seem able to understand that the purpose of the airline is not to make pilot jobs available to those pilots that prefer to fly larger aircraft. How stupid of them.

At this stage of the game, we the pilots have ourselves created the situations that management is exploiting to the fullest. Instead of embracing each other, we tried to exclude each other. That gave management a loophole in our contracts that it never had before and they have used it well.

Today, instead of reuniting with each other and standing against the management, we are at war with each other. That isn't lost on them and the more we fight among ourselves, the more they win.

There was once a time when all airline pilots recognized each other and did not discriminate against each other based on the size of our equipment. A DC-6 pilot didn't think that a DC-3 pilot was "inferior". A DC-9 pilot lived happily with a CV-440 pilot or an F-27 pilot, in the same airline. Today, it is often all a major airline pilot can bring himself to do to simply nod and say good morning to an RJ pilot. We have become the victims of our own fabricated concept of superiority.

It is pointless to worry and squabble about what kind of airplane flys to where or for what reason. It's management's job to make that determination and to do it in a way that makes the company profitable. For example, if the SWA pilots were demanding that their company buy 767s and not so many 737s, SWA would not be the success that it is today.

You might find it "far" from ORD to TPA, but how long does it take in an RJ as opposed to a 737? What matters is not the airplane you use, but the number of people that will fly on it at a given time. If you have 50 people that want to go and you carry them on a 73, you will lose lots of money. Put them on a CRJ and you'll make a substantial profit.

Should we operate only RJs? Of course not. Neither can we operate only 747s. The market must determine which is appropriate.

The major airlines would be owning and operating the RJs if their pilots had allowed them to do so. Then every "regional pilot" would be a "major pilot" flying in a different airplane. The mainline pilots did not want to fly the small airplanes because they didn't want to be paid accordingly. They tried to prevent them from flying and excluded them from the mainline. The plan was a bad one and it failed miserably. Nevertheless, they are sticking to it and will not even talk about change. At the same time, they complain that the regional jets are "taking their jobs". Had they not excluded the regional jets in the first place, they would have ALL the jobs.

When and if we ever get over this stupid behavior and become one again, folks like you will be able to join the industry and climb the ladders just as it was before. That's what I ultimately hope for.

Best wishes to you in the future.

 

[Timebuilder]

Thanks, Surplus. A really good explanation.

I remember that kind of inclusive brotherhood among airline pilots, going back to my days in the back of the airplane.

I for one will be very happy when we slay this dragon, and stand together as an industry.