RJ Vs. Alpa

[Buschpilot]

I'm hesitant to jump in this pool, but I have a personal curiousity here.

I'm not an expert on the RJ issue, although I try to keep up since the industry is headed in this direction, but I simply don't have the time to dig around - so I ask this question here to those who are knowledgeable on the issue:

ALPA is being sued by the pilots of Comair and ASA (correct me if I'm wrong, please) over the issue of equal representation. What exactly are they suing for? In other words, if the pilots win, what will they walk away with (other than pride)?

On the other hand, if ALPA wins, what will they walk away with?

Thanks in advance for all the professionalism out there.

B

 

[surplus1]

If you are interested in this matter go to www.rjdefense.com. There you will see the RJDC version of the issues, related info and the lawsuit itself.

For obvious reasons, ALPA has not chosen to state its defense in public.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Actually, ALPA has publically stated its defense. They have said the suit is completely without merit, and have indicated that they will soon submit a motion to dismiss.

 

[Ted Striker]

Not ASA, yet.

So far no one from ASA has officially joined the batch. I hope that we don't. I'd really like to keep my name out of it.

 

[350DRIVER]

I have been following this "debate" here for quite sometime and I have a few questions since it appears that you are either for this or 100% completely against it....

Why should DAL be "forced" to "limit" or put a cap on the number of routes/flights/planes that "there" commuters fly since it is DAL that "owns" Comair..??- Just curious since it appears to somewhat defy logical reasoning as a whole....

How is what DAL is doing is "wrong"?

I know alot would like for ALPA to loose but folks is this even possible.??-

T H A N K S

3 5 0

 

[surplus1]

Actually, ALPA has publically stated its defense. They have said the suit is completely without merit, and have indicated that they will soon submit a motion to dismiss.

Such a statement is routine and can hardly be viewed as a "defense". It brings to mind a certain grievance that FM was without merit too. ALPA talks as much as Tyson did. We'll see how they do in the ring.

BTW FDJ, ALPA has filed its long awaited motion to dismiss. I don't know the exact date but a hearing will be coming up before too long. Round one begins...... 11 more to go.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

. ALPA talks as much as Tyson did. We'll see how they do in the ring.

Actually, it seems to me that the vast majority of Tyson-like trash talk has come from the rjdc, in the form of news interviews, press releases, etc.

Hopefully, and in my opinion, probably, they will get a beating like Tyson's!

Glad to hear that things are starting to move.

 

[Freight Dog]

I don't work for any DCI carriers, but I see so many people pi$$ed off at DALPA because of scope and all this RJDC garbage.

Look... it's rather simple, you pull a B737 off and put a CRJ in its place, and you've taken 10 mainline pilot jobs away. Of course they'll scope you to protect their interests.

But an interesting thing is... the management signed the contract agreeing to the cap. If the management did not want it that way, then they would not have signed it. Am I right?

Finally, here at Island Air, we're a sister company to Aloha Airlines, and we are scoped by our big sister Aloha: We can't fly direct between any of the major Hawaii airports, so you'll never see Island Air fly HNL-OGG direct, we have to stop in Molokai or Lanai. So after 9/11, Aloha pulled out of Maui to Big Island routes, and we "took it over" but had to fly via Lanai or Molokai in order to serve them. Mind you, Aloha wasn't even flying those routes, but yet they were still subject to scope.
The management apparently wanted Aloha ALPA to loosen the scope clause. Aloha pilots wouldn't budge, and guess what... all of Aloha's furloughees are back, and they took a whole bunch of our captains in the process.

Scope the regionals??? HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Less regional equipment flown for peanuts = more higher paying jobs.

The logic of more RJ's = more mainline jobs is a bunch of crap!

 

[Ted Striker]

I'm with Freight Dawg!!!

 

[Dieterly]

FDJ,

Not a DCI pilot, just a former commuter dog...

Don't you think that the "market" will finally decide what type of equipment will be flown on certain routes, and by whom?

Also, why didn't mainline pilots "bitch" about scope, when lots of mainline routes was beeing flown by props (I never heard a DL, UA , AA or US pilot claiming they should fly a Basilia or SAAB at mainline rates)?
Personally, I think I got the answer to that one, it all comes down to "my **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** doesn't stink" syndrome, or the "DBA" syndrome.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Deiter,

To answer your question: I am fearful that the market may eventually determine what planes are flown by whom. As a conservative, I am normally in favor of such an arangement, but as a union member, I consider it a threat. If the "market" was truly free, than cabotage would be legalized, and we would be codesharing with Korean Air pilots flying lga to atl for $.50 per hour. Please try to consider that there will always be someone willing to do your job for less, if given the opportunity. Should we really allow such a bidding war to start?

As a union, we have the right, and responsibility to exert certain pressures on mgt for our collective good. That has been the case since to inception of unions, and it has led to some pretty valuable advancements.

I think that it benefits all of us to try to foster the growth of high-paying jobs, while trying to limit the outsourcing of those jobs to low wage carriers.

I will admit that our ability to do so is definitely in question right now.

The answer to the second part of your question is pretty obvious, but I'll answer it anyway. Those saabs and brasilias were not replacing mainline flying, so they were not considered a threat. With the advent of the rj, however, mgt had a new tool with which they could fly routes that previously could only have been flown by a mainline jet.

For the record, I think that ALPA was short-sighted when they allowed mgt to farm out ANY flying.


Not sure what "DBA" means, but the "stink" syndrome does not apply here.

P.S.
I'm a former "commuter dog" myself, although I don't think we are supposed to use that term anymore!

 

[Dieterly]

Should we really allow such a bidding war to start?

As a consumer I think we should, as long as it's kept within limits. Letting a foreign company having access to our domestic market is a weak argument. Let's say you live in SOCAL and you looking for a moving company to help you to move, but you think that the quoted prices from the US companys are a bit to steep, so now legally you can just let a Mexican company help you to move from LA to San Fran.

Those saabs and brasilias were not replacing mainline flying

Just a few examples: Delta pulled out of the GNV-ATL, replaced by ATR's, USAir left GNV-CLT, JAX-CLT, CLT-TLH, BNG-BOS, all replaced by those pesky T-P's,that sure looks like replacement to me.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Deiter,

A. I am not an airline consumer, I am an airline pilot. If you want opinions from a consumer's point of view, you might have more luck on another board.

B. Not really sure where you were going with you "mover" story. If it meant you are in favor of cabotage, I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

C. You mentioned a few mainline flights replaced with turboprops. Congrats... It must have taken a while. I'll amend my answer to read: "With a few exceptions," turboprops are not replacing mainline flights. Is that better? I think the rest of my response still stands.

 

[Bluestreak]

Math question

Freightdog says :

"Look... it's rather simple, you pull a B737 off and put a CRJ in its place, and you've taken 10 mainline pilot jobs away. Of course they'll scope you to protect their interests."

Since I'm kinda slow-a 737 holds how many ? 130 pax or so ? Since a CRJ holds 50,what did you do with the other 80 pax ?
put em' on the bus ? Perhaps you advocate your company losing money ? Or maybe triple the fares to make up the difference ? FDJ's fears are well founded,it's economic democracy in action.Pax will vote with their wallet,and just like Wal-Mart,the low price leader will be king.Pax don't care about your "lifestyle",pay,working conditions-nothing but the ticket price and safe,reliable service,and you can't wish it away,try as you might.Driving costs down and profits up is what mgt. strives for and you either compete or die.Perhaps you have something "extra" that the no-frills carriers don't have that adds value to the end product.Right now,US Airways does not,even though some here think U has some sort of "snob appeal",laughable when you have to ride a Dash from CLT-TLH.

 

[Freight Dog]

Depends on the configuration.. Aloha's 737's hold 112 in coach and 12 in first for a total of 124. SWA's 737-700's hold 137.

The management does not just take one B737 off and puts 1 CRJ. From what I've seen, if there were 3 flights in B737. Now there are 5 CRJ flights, and no B737's. What's the logic? I'd say cheaper labor. You can argue passenger convenience, but then again, I've seen CRJ's leave BNA on what used to be a B737 route within an hour of each other. What gives?? United Express carriers are all hiring, while United has pilots on furlough. What's wrong with this picture from a pilot's view? Pay for starters followed by work rules, etc etc.

I'm a Dash 8 pilot, and I love my job. But I want my Aloha brothers to restrict my growth here as much as possible, so I could have growth when I join them over on the other side of the fence where as a 2nd year FO I'll make more than a 10 year Dash 8 captain here.

Maybe it's just me... but I look ahead. I thought thinking ahead and staying ahead of the ball game was required of us. Hmmm.... maybe I'm wrong.