RJDC and my life

[Tim47SIP]

Rich wrote - "I am all for 'the one list' concept but DOH kills it for me. In the past, the regionals have been a stepping stone to the majors. Personally, all I have ever wanted to do is fly big airplanes at a major airline. The regionals have suddenly been turned into a career for many and these pilots have been slapped in the face recently with this reality.

Many people that would never continue on with the dream of flying at the majors (for reasons like no degree, an accident, an incident, whatever) see this lawsuit as a way to earn the respect, success and income they feared they would never achieve in their career path. It's hard to argue with their reality."

1. Dont think actual DOH is an issue. DOH with COM/ASA then staple to the bottom of Mainline.

2. Mainline would still have requirements like, a degree, 5000 hours in X or Y, no accidents, first class med, etc. Don't have the quals, you dont get to bid up. Pretty simple if you ask me.

 

[RichardFitzwell]

Richard,
Who ever said DOH to you? Do you know that this was a rumor, started by ALPA, to make mainline pilots think that regional pilots were after their senority? No regional pilot, that I know of, has ever seriously asked for, or expected DOH in any form for any merger. So, does that bring it back to life for you?

Hey sarcastic,

I was responding to Flyin@500agl's post...

You need to mellow out!

 

[aero99]

skydiver,

I am and will be ignorant because I have only read parts of arguments from this board and from the fact that I don't and won't fly for a living. No matter how much I read, I will be ignorant to seeing the way either side sees the issues.

In my opinion, more RJ's means more jobs over the long run. It is also a fact that not all commercial pilots will get a chance to make 300k plus and fly the wide bodies. This issue hasn't really changed since the RJ debate started. Not everyone gets to be a Major League pitcher either. Yet, many dream and work very hard to get there.

Airlines are going to do everything in their power to reduce cost and maximize profits. If that means RJ with 50, 70 or 90 seats flying what the mainline pilots fly then it is and will happen. No different in any other industry. Eat or be eaten. That being said, I can't see the rationaliztion that the RJ pilot should be paid what the 76 pilot makes. I can see how this could make that same RJ pilot very angry as if they are being taken advantage of. You are. That is business and that is how businesses survive in the airline industry, medical industry and law industry to name a few.

I saw on an earlier post that RJ Capt can top out at 100k per year. Don't know how accurate that is but seems rational. With more RJ's and fewer widebodies I don't see anyway around some aspiring RJ pilots having to be " stuck" at this level. We are in pretty bad shape if we find ourselves unhappy flying for a career and making 6 digits. 100k a year is a nice income. So is 300k a year, but everyone can't make the top pay.

I wish I had a solution. I understand how hard it might be for some to realize that their initial dreams might not become as fruitful as they original thought. At the same time, there will always be a side of me that wishes I could have flown for a living no matter what Union issues are at hand.

You guys have the best job in the world and even if you don't get to fly the aircraft you wanted to, you will still make a very nice income, while doing what you love to do.

The grass is always greener......especially for us stuck flying the desk.

Good luck to all of you and fly safe.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Yes, absoulutely. If the taxi guys were purchased by Delta, and they wanted to merge with us, and get fair treatment from our common union, we would fight just as hard for their rights.

Actually SDD, while that sounds noble, it is incorrect. CMR's recently ratified contract includes language which forces mgt to combine the lists of only those carriers which operate airplanes with 19 or more seats. It appears that you have done the same thing that you are accusing us of. Seems a bit hypocritical. Those taxi guys would be in the same position you are, and there would be nothing you could do for them.

P.S.
My info regarding CMR's contract might be incorrect, as I do not have a copy. However, I believe that I remember seeing the 19-seat limit. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[bobbysamd]

Flying RJs v. not flying at all

Good post by Aero 99. I've tried to follow this and similar debates. I come from the same perspective. I am living proof that not all commercial pilots get hired and are paid the $300K. I applied, unsuccessfully, to nearly every commuter to try to fly anything. Not only will management try to reduce costs and maximize profits, historically it keeps trying to reduce staffing.

I agree with Aero 99 100%. I was never in it for the money, though I expected to be compensated fairly and treated properly. I was in it because I loved to fly. To be paid (fairly) for it was just icing on the cake.

Hopefully, someone will solve this dilemma.

 

[aceshigh]

If you want current Comair contract info, go to the downloads section at V1rotate.com. It has most of the current airline contracts for download, including both old and new Comair.

Aceshigh

 

[~~~^~~~]

Re: Thanks for the comments...

To Mr. Wiggly wings, I see your point on being more in control of the RJ agenda by keeping them in the union. Actually what I had in mind was spin them out of the company not the union. A split from the union would be an answer for the RJDC lawsuit that correctly points out that ALPA is not serving them well. As to the 767 vs. 747... these are both planes that give pilots enough pay, job enjoyment and decent work rules to live. Three RJs flying CVG-PHX in lieu of a 757 takes us in the wrong direction on these issues.

Getting the Connection pilots out of the Company, or the Union, will not end the litigation. ALPA has already committed the act and incurred the liability.

It is like a speeding ticket - I might slow down once the blue lights come on, but I have still exceeded the speed limit and still have to pay the penalty. ALPA has already engaged in negotiations which harm ALPA members in violation of Article 1 of the Consitution and Bylaws. Kicking us out will not change the fact that we were members when the harm took place and the fact that ALPA violated its obligation to the Connection pilots.

The 747 / 767 example depends on whether you are a 747 pilot. If you are a 747 pilot, the 767 is a low wage threat to 747 flying. However, the 767 will result in more crews being hired, and likely helped you get your current job.

You used the RJ / 757 example. First, three RJ's do not have capacity of a 757, but if three RJ's replace a 737-200 I would argue that the net result benefits the profession - certainly the wages of the six pilots in the RJ's beats the two in the 737. Second, you probably are not fully up to date on the pay rates - we exceed $118 an hour on CRJ equipment. Third, the 737-200 is on its way out anyway since it is no longer market competitive, even for Southwest.

Right now is the perfect opportunity to resolve the RJDC litigation. The Delta MEC is in negotiations on scope re-set. Since everyone is at the table, why not invite the ASA and Comair MEC's to participate and represent their pilots? Why not use this opportunity to push for one list?

Lets face it, the Delta pilots forced a contract which compensates them more than any other pilot group on the planet. With mainline losing over $3 million a day it is only a matter of time until economics force concessionary bargaining. When this bargaining begins would you rather have 8,000 pilots, or 11,700 pilots negotiating together? Would you rather have one unit performing Delta domestic flying, or six competing units? If this goes to full section six negotiations, do you have faith that 4,500 qualified jet pilots would honor the Delta MEC's picket line when some Delta pilots feel that Connection pilots should be thrown out of ALPA?

You need us in more than you want us out. Take the opportunity to restore the profession through inclusion.

 

[surplus1]

Actually SDD, while that sounds noble, it is incorrect. CMR's recently ratified contract includes language which forces mgt to combine the lists of only those carriers which operate airplanes with 19 or more seats. It appears that you have done the same thing that you are accusing us of. Seems a bit hypocritical. Those taxi guys would be in the same position you are, and there would be nothing you could do for them.

P.S.
My info regarding CMR's contract might be incorrect, as I do not have a copy. However, I believe that I remember seeing the 19-seat limit. Please correct me if I am wrong.

FDJ,

What SDD said is not excluded by the content of the Comair contract, just as fighting for unity between Delta/ASA/Comair pilots is not excluded by the Delta contract. There is a difference between what is contractually permissable and what is is desired or pursued.

You are correct about the content of the Comair contract. What you don't know is how that got there. I do.

That component of the Comair contract was originally part of a quid pro quo proposal. We wound up not getting what we wanted and being stuck with the part of the proposal that should have been eliminated with the other. Why didn't that happen? ALPA. When you negotiators have to argue against the company and against their own ALPA attorney (who is arguing for the company), things get messy. What we didn't get, was what ALPA didn't want. What got left, was consistent with what ALPA does want. There's a lot more to this sort of thing than meets the inexperienced eye.

Our Section One proposals were almost a total failure, thanks mainly to ALPA attorney's unwillingness to pursue them, dilution of language, objections from high ALPA officials (like the executive administrator) and conflicts with the "preferred party's" (Delta) Section 1, which ALPA fought to prevent. Who did they fight? US.

When the DMEC wants something in its Scope clause, the best minds in ALPA work overtime to craft the proper language. When airlines like Comair want something in Scope, ALPA lawyers work overtime to find reasons why they shouldn't have it or can't get it. I'm sorry, but you just don't understand.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Surplus - did the ALPA attorneys actually use the phrase "preferred party?"

So much for representation "equally and without discrimination."

 

[bdejong]

Rich wrote - "I am all for 'the one list' concept but DOH kills it for me. In the past, the regionals have been a stepping stone to the majors. Personally, all I have ever wanted to do is fly big airplanes at a major airline. The regionals have suddenly been turned into a career for many and these pilots have been slapped in the face recently with this reality.

Many people that would never continue on with the dream of flying at the majors (for reasons like no degree, an accident, an incident, whatever) see this lawsuit as a way to earn the respect, success and income they feared they would never achieve in their career path. It's hard to argue with their reality."

1. Dont think actual DOH is an issue. DOH with COM/ASA then staple to the bottom of Mainline.

2. Mainline would still have requirements like, a degree, 5000 hours in X or Y, no accidents, first class med, etc. Don't have the quals, you dont get to bid up. Pretty simple if you ask me.

Tim47sip,
Actually, even if you staple us (I am a cmr guy) we could still bid up in seniority order. When dal bought western they got guys who didn't have a college degree and probably some with incidents on their record as well. They just got put on the list and as long as they stay qual'ed they bid like every one else.
Brian De Jong

 

[trigeek]

Wigglywings,
You wrote,

"Right now is the perfect opportunity to resolve the RJDC litigation. The Delta MEC is in negotiations on scope re-set. Since everyone is at the table, why not invite the ASA and Comair MEC's to participate and represent their pilots? Why not use this opportunity to push for one list?"

What does this accomplish? Your reps sitting at the table while we negotiate scope does nothing but stir the pot. Our reps are negotiating for US. We already have the weakest scope clause in the industry and you cry foul over that. Your solution seems to be no scope. So what's the point of having you there? So you can leave the meeting even more convinced ALPA screwed you? I agree ALPA can't represent both groups. One list will NEVER happen....Leo won't accept it. DALPA would never give the concessions required to even seriously negotiate it (nor should they).

So that leaves your lawsuit. One of your supporters I spoke with recently said "It's not about the money." He is suppossedly a senior Comair Capt and an early supporter of the RJDC. He couldn't ell me the amount because that wasn't the isse...If it's not about the $100,000,000 and the attempt to bankrupt ALPA then why the absurd sums of money?

Call a spade a spade. It is about greed. As I read your lawsuit, it looks like the $100,000,000 is in addition to the "not less than $2,000,000 for each Comair pilot". Oh, then there's the seniority integration issue. Say what you will here, but your lawsuit stipulates,

"192. By virtue of the foregoing breach of contract, plaintiffs and all Comair pilots are entitled to a permanent injunction enjoining ALPA from failing and/or refusing to invoke its merger policy, and therefore requiring it to take all reasonable and necessary steps to seek to integrate the pilot seniority lists of the Delta and Comair pilots."

That's not stable language. That's "I can't or won't do what it takes to get hired so I'll screw others" language.

I've read these boards off and on for a while. When pressed, the RJDC champions hide behind vague generalities and character assisinations. Why? Because it is about trying to get something for nothing and advance themselves at others expense.

Flame away..