RJDC 6/26 update

[FurloughedAgain]

Surplus said,

create a new subsidiary with no retirement....

For what it's worth, MidAtlantic is not a subsidiary -- it has no certificate of its own. It is a division of mainline US Airways, similar to Song, Metrojet, Delta Express, Shuttle by United et al.

The aircraft are flown on the US Airways certificate by US Airways pilots. (their callsign is USAir as well) The only difference is that MidAtlantic is subject to a fence which prevents pilots from bidding back and forth between "MidAtlantic" and "mainline".

Chautauqua/Republic have a similar fence arrangement.

Surplus is right. As of now there is no complete contract, and the retirement consists of 401K plus matching only.

It did do one thing though. It acts as a bridge between wholly-owned subsidiaries and mainline US Airways. A single seniority list was created (albeit forced upon some of the wholly owneds) in which the wholly owned pilots are offered the opportunity to "flow" to MidAtlantic (and they may preference which seat they would like to be called to) and then -- assuming the company survives -- flow to US Airways.

If they decline the flow their seat at their respective carriers is theirs forever. Their seniority is theirs forever. If they accept the flow they bring their longevity to MidAtlantic for pay purposes -- a benefit that was not offered to the furloughed pilots (some of whome have in excess of 15 years seniority).

Assuming the carrier survives there will never be another "newhire" at US Airways. The most junior aircraft at US Airways will, at least for the time being, be a Dash-8 or CRJ. With 1800 pilots on furlough and another 2000 at the wholly-owneds on the CEL (combined eligibility list) it will be a long time for many of them to flow to the mainline. But if US Airways survives MidAtlantic will have done a great service to the pilots by removing Allegheny, Piedmont, and PSA from the whipsaw.

It ain't perfect I admit. But coming from a company such as US Airways, i'd say its not a half-bad start.

 

[michael707767]

Between the glass ceiling of 70-seats max and the actual low end of the mainline work today lies a gray area that neither the mainline (Delta pilots) nor the subsidiaries (DCI) have entered as yet. That is defined by the gap between DAL's smallest aircraft and DCI's largest aircraft, i.e., the 71-100+ seat range. This is virgin territory for both groups.

Actually, its not virgin territory. The Delta pilots have flwon aircraft in the 71-100 seat range, but thats not the point. There will always be an unfilled gap. Thats why the limit is set at 70 seats. If one way or another, the Delta pilots were to allow an aircraft in the 71-99 seat range to be flown by someone else, "outsourced", just exactly how many 100 seaters do you think would be flown at the mainline? None. Allowing outsourcing on aircraft up to 100 seats would just create a new "gap". All the sudden it you would not see any aircraft in the 100-140 seat range at the mainline, and there would be cries from guys like you that this gap needs to be filled. No, the seat limit is where it is for a reason. Effectively, it protects the 100 seat flying.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

hey pylit

come on over and get the books and have 7 (only) sims and take the checkride.

 

[ifly4food]

Fins,

You and I are on the same side (I think) but please, don't think that any part of this equation is about what is "fair".

I'm not familair with the displacement provisions of the current ASA contract, so I don't know how your ATR pilots will be reassigned.

However, you do have a seniority section and a filling of vacancies section in your contract. Unless your MEC or your pilot group agrees to J4J, there is no way that anyone can force Delta pilots onto to your "list" ahead of ASA pilots. They can put them on the bottom of your list but they cannot give them "super seniority" without your consent. Your contract is "amendable" but (short of bankruptcy) the status quo remains in place.

Please tell me that your MEC is NOT considering some foolish agreement like the one at PDT/PSA/ALG/CHQ/TSA/MES. Your posts are leading me to suspect that you might be. Tell me that I'm wrong, please.

No, Surplus, our MEC is NOT considering anything of the sort. A J4J scheme hasn't even been proposed.

 

[AFELLOWAVIATOR]

Then we would get most of the new 70 seaters and 100 seaters. Dalpa will not give up jobs, and Delta (Grinstein) wants his large pay cuts. Flight Safety won't mind who uses the sims----Delta pays for them anyways. The recalls are set, and the new airplanes I believe will be mostly 100 seaters and some 70 seaters.


Bye Bye--General Lee

You are hilarious!

You guys have no leverage. You WILL give up the farm because you don't want to loose half of your retirement in BK.
Do you really think that you guys are going into this thing with demands? Come on. Wke up and smell the coffee. You people will be told what the deal will be or it is straight to the BK judge. From what I have read, Mr. G. aint looking to "negotiate" any thing......he knows what he needs, which is now way more than he needed from you last time, and if he don't get it, well, you know the rest of the story.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus said,
For what it's worth, MidAtlantic is not a subsidiary -- it has no certificate of its own. It is a division of mainline US Airways, similar to Song, Metrojet, Delta Express, Shuttle by United et al.

Technically you are correct with respect to MidAtlantic. Sorry, there were so many ever-changing Letters of Agreement that I had a temporary lapse of memory. With resptect to Song I believe it is a corporate subsidiary of Delta Air Lines like Comair, but I'm not sure about the operating certificate. You say MAA has not certificate -- does it have a "corporate" identity?

One difference is that Song's pilots have a common "list" and contract with Delta mainline; not the same as MAA. However, the other Song employees are not Delta employees. The MAA pilot group does not appear to have a common list with USAirways. If it did, U pilots would not have to give up their longevity when they elect to fly for MAA and start at year one. In the absence of a valid contract for MAA pilots, it's anybody's guess as to what they have or don't have or when they have or don't have it.

It did do one thing though. It acts as a bridge between wholly-owned subsidiaries and mainline US Airways. A single seniority list was created (albeit forced upon some of the wholly owneds) in which the wholly owned pilots are offered the opportunity to "flow" to MidAtlantic (and they may preference which seat they would like to be called to) and then -- assuming the company survives -- flow to US Airways.

What you're really saying is that its a "double flow-through" from PDT/ALG/PSA to MAA to AAA, at least in theory and until the next change in the LOA. That could have been avoided many years ago were it not for the intransigence of the AAA MEC. We all have our opinions as to the "value" of this "deal" and its duration, even if AAA does ultimately survive. If there was ever a convoluted abortion, in my opinion it meets that requirement and then some.

But if US Airways survives MidAtlantic will have done a great service to the pilots by removing Allegheny, Piedmont, and PSA from the whipsaw.

And replacing them with MAA? Such a deal. And then of course there are so many other "code-share" subcontractors that it's almost impossible to keep track of them. AAA management and the ALPA unit at U could hardly have created a bigger mess.

It ain't perfect I admit. But coming from a company such as US Airways, i'd say its not a half-bad start.

Like they say, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." I have no doubt that Beebe thinks he did a great thing. I guess ALPA thinks he did too since it was followed by his "election" to National office. The Peter Principle appears to work in labor unions much like it works in the rest of corporate America.

I have a lot of friends at U whose views don't seem to fully echo yours. The "big picture" over there has more than one perspective, just like the picture at DAL.

The whole thing is somewhat of a mess, I'd say, and from the looks of things it will get messier before it gets better.

Regards

 

[surplus1]

Actually, its not virgin territory. The Delta pilots have flwon aircraft in the 71-100 seat range, but thats not the point.

Of course you're right Michael. The Delta pilots have flown aircraft with 28-seats, and 54-seats too but, as you say, that wasn't the point.

There will always be an unfilled gap. Thats why the limit is set at 70 seats. If one way or another, the Delta pilots were to allow an aircraft in the 71-99 seat range to be flown by someone else, "outsourced", just exactly how many 100 seaters do you think would be flown at the mainline? None. Allowing outsourcing on aircraft up to 100 seats would just create a new "gap". All the sudden it you would not see any aircraft in the 100-140 seat range at the mainline, and there would be cries from guys like you that this gap needs to be filled. No, the seat limit is where it is for a reason. Effectively, it protects the 100 seat flying.

All of that is correct but for two exceptions. 1)I am not crying for the gap to be filled by guys like me. 2) The creation of a gap was not mandatory, it was voluntary. There would be no "gap" at all if there were no alter egos. There would be no alter egos if the Delta MEC/ALPA had not permitted that condition to exist. In fact they actually created it and then acted to perpetuate it.

My only real argument is that once you create a gap by drawing an artificial line, you can't keep changing that gap by redrawing the line whenever and wherever you want it.

It is not the concept of a "gap" that causes the conflict, it is the constant attempts to redefine it, at our expense. The line was drawn at 70-seats and everything below it unlimited. Put it back to that position and the conflict will go away and the market will take care of the rest.

On the other side of that coin, if the Delta pilots continue efforts to take the 70-seat "gauge" and restrict the 50-seat "quage", they can expect that effort to be countered, including exposure to a battle for the 71-100 seat range.

As you yourself point out, for as long as there is a "changing gap", efforts to manipulate it by one group or the other will continue. We did not advocate this "variable gap". The Delta pilots did. There are consequences to everything that we do.

"Self preservation is nature's first law." That is a two-way street, both in nature and in the airline business. Wherever there is a predator the intended victim will seek ways to preserve the survival of his species. That may include becoming a predator himself.

"Be careful what you ask for; you might get it."

 

[~~~^~~~]

No, Surplus, our MEC is NOT considering anything of the sort. A J4J scheme hasn't even been proposed.

How do you know? ALPA's J4J protocol ( US Air, United, and now NWA ) makes the predatory mainline bargaining unilateral, since in ALPA's view all the flying belongs to mainline anyway.

You know that Delta needs work rules changes, you know Delta is paying furlough protected pilots to sit at home now, you know that more efficient utilization of Delta pilots will result in more furloughs ( 800 to 1,000 ) and you know Delta would love to have an RJ pay rate to put these guys on. You also know that Delta is the only carrier without a jets for jobs program and you know ALPA and Delta are currently in negotiations. You can either connect the dots for yourself, or wait a couple weeks for written confirmation.

~~~^~~~

 

[~~~^~~~]

Unless your MEC or your pilot group agrees to J4J, there is no way that anyone can force Delta pilots onto to your "list" ahead of ASA pilots. They can put them on the bottom of your list but they cannot give them "super seniority" without your consent. Your contract is "amendable" but (short of bankruptcy) the status quo remains in place.

Please tell me that your MEC is NOT considering some foolish agreement like the one at PDT/PSA/ALG/CHQ/TSA/MES. Your posts are leading me to suspect that you might be. Tell me that I'm wrong, please.

Surplus :

Our MEC has been in the love in mode with John Malone because he "understands" our issues and the "BSIC is for real now." We are also given the message that "ALPA is a Democracy and we can only do the best we can within the system by coalition building." Our MEC still has not recovered from the fact that they were right on the PID, but the politics were wrong. Now they are pragmatists.

I expect our MEC will be given the same tremendously difficult choice faced by the US Air Express MEC's - either to go along with J4J with "super seniority" in exchange for a flow through, or, be left to bid amongst any and all wanna be DCI carriers for airplanes under a J4J scheme ( and likely being shut out ).

In their shoes, I'm not sure what I'd do.... The fact this will be a done deal before the DCI MEC's have any confirmation it has happened just makes it more difficult to address.

The ASA pilots have a lot bigger fish to fry than their current contract, negotiations are about to go into a completely new paradigm - we are going to be negotiating for the scraps after mainline eats their fill.

~~~^~~~

 

[avrodriverj85]

Don't forget about the b.s. brewing over at NWA and the fallout it will have on XJ and 9E.