RJDC letter to DW

[FurloughedAgain]

deleted due to lack of interest.

 

[AutoBus]

Would you oppose ASA/Skywest flying 100+ seaters on their own, separate from the Delta codeshare?

Joe

That would actually make them an airline, refreshing..... But naw, they would not want to do that way too risky, can't make money that way (see FLYI). better to have mainline pay all your costs and give you 5 to 7% margin..

 

[michael707767]

Would you oppose ASA flying 90 seaters for another codeshare partner now that we aren't going to be wholly owned?

Would you oppose ASA/Skywest flying 100+ seaters on their own, separate from the Delta codeshare?

whether or not I oppose it is irrelevant. I believe it is legal now under our contract, with some restraints. Actually, don't know about any aircraft over 100 seats, but I think the E-190 is legal as long as its not flown under Delta code or on a route Delta operates. So, within that, my opinion doesn't matter.

 

[JoeMerchant]

That would actually make them an airline, refreshing..... But naw, they would not want to do that way too risky, can't make money that way (see FLYI). better to have mainline pay all your costs and give you 5 to 7% margin..

That's not what I asked. Do you support mainline scope language that limits what ASA/SKYW does OUTSIDE of the DAL/UAL codeshares? If it isn't going to happen, then why the language in mainline scope sections that limit what the regional codeshares do OUTSIDE of the codeshare?

Joe

 

[JoeMerchant]

whether or not I oppose it is irrelevant. I believe it is legal now under our contract, with some restraints. Actually, don't know about any aircraft over 100 seats, but I think the E-190 is legal as long as its not flown under Delta code or on a route Delta operates. So, within that, my opinion doesn't matter.

Well then why did ACA have to terminate the DAL codeshare when it started Indy Air? Your scope language DOES limit what we do outside the DAL codeshare and thus the reason there is an RJDC.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Because I really don't want to spend much time on this: Can one of you RJDC's please explain to me what the end game is here? How big an aircraft would satisfy your needs? And at what kind of pay and benefits?

Trying to get a sense of the nature of the beast.

It is about representation.

What airplanes are flown where for how much are up to the union's membership.

The RJDC is not about a scope solution, pay rate, or "stealing" seniority, airplanes, or anything of the sort.

The scope problem is a symptom of ALPA's promotion of some members' interests while denying other members the ability to negotiate contracts which bind the party which has operational control of their flying. But scope is merely a symptom - the disease is the failure of representation.

The "end game" is the result of whatever pilots negotiate for themselves on a level playing field. The RJDC just wants to the process work the way it is supposed to.

Arguing about E170's is sexy, but it is really irrelevant to the RJDC battle. About the closest the RJDC gets to the issue is that they believe that scope which was negotiated in a way that excluded parties who had the right to be represented is invalid. Basically the offending contract language would have to be re-negotiated with the proper parties at the table. The result of those negotiations depend on the MEC's and Companies involved.

~~~^~~~

 

[FurloughedAgain]

"the disease is the failure of representation."

Don't they have a cream for that?

 

[JoeMerchant]

"the disease is the failure of representation."

Don't they have a cream for that?

No but ALPA does have a committee that will study why the disease is present. The committee will then recommend further study to determine if there is need for a cream. In 5 years, if the committee determines that there is need for a cream, it will form another study committee to best determine how to apply the cream.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

(yawn) the association is a dinosaur.

They're not providing useful representation to anyone. They just take their 2% and watch the thousands of furloughs, thousands of outsourced jobs, thousands of pension plans eliminated.

What is it they do again?

 

[AutoBus]

It is about representation.

What airplanes are flown where for how much are up to the union's membership.

The RJDC is not about a scope solution, pay rate, or "stealing" seniority, airplanes, or anything of the sort.

The scope problem is a symptom of ALPA's promotion of some members' interests while denying other members the ability to negotiate contracts which bind the party which has operational control of their flying. But scope is merely a symptom - the disease is the failure of representation.

The "end game" is the result of whatever pilots negotiate for themselves on a level playing field. The RJDC just wants to the process work the way it is supposed to.

Arguing about E170's is sexy, but it is really irrelevant to the RJDC battle.

dude, RJ lift providers are subcontractors. if you have an issue your contract talk to your company. If I have an issue with my contract I talk to my company.

I take exception to an employee of a sub contractor argueing that my contract (or who ever represents me) is unfair to him. ALPA need sto protect my interests to my company, ALPA needs to protect your interests to your company. ALPA has no business trying to protect your interests to my company.

So your saying ALPA is not representing you because they refuse to interfere (on behalf of you) with my contract with my company?