RJDC Update - March 8 (part 1)

[Clownpilot]

LOL

STILL AT IT EH BOYS???

FDJ-
I CAN'T BELIEVE YOURE DOING THIS TO YOURSELF.
PUT THE KEYBOARD DOWN AND SLOWLY BACK AWAY.
OH, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING. YOU THINK YOU CAN PRESENT VALID ARGUMENTS, USE REASONED THINKING AND FACTS TO SUPPORT YOUR POSITION. ONLY NOW ARE YOU REALIZING THAT DOESN'T WORK. YOU'RE POUNDING YOUR HEAD AGAINST THE WALL AND YOU'RE DOING IT TO YOURSELF. YOU HAVE TO STOP MAN. GIVE YOURSELF SOME PEACE.

FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME I ENGAGED THIS DEBATE. IT DIDN'T TAKE ME LONG TO REALIZE THESE PEOPLE CANNOT BE REASONED WITH OR DEALT WITH LIKE INDIVIDUALS.

WHY?? BECAUSE THERE IS NO BASIC MERIT TO THEIR POSITION SO THEY ARE CONSTANTLY CREATING ONE. A BRIEF LOOK AT THE PLAYERS TELLS YOU WHY.

SURPLUS- NEAR THE END OF HIS CAREER AND BITTER HE NEVER AMOUNTED TO ANYTHING BUT REALIZES HE CAN'T ACT OUT AGGRESSIVELY SO HE HAS FOUND THE ONLY VENUE HE HAS TO RETALIATE. HE CHANGES SPOTS SO OFTEN YOU CAN NEVER REALLY PIN HIM DOWN. POSTS A LEGIBLE ARGUMENT AND SOMEWHAT SKILLFULLY TWISTS THE FACTS TO FIT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TO SAY. IN SHORT, HE WASTED HIS LIFE AND HE'S ANGRY AT THE MAINLINE GUYS AND NOW HE HAS FOUND A WAY TO STICK YOU IN THE RIBS. DON'T LET HIM. JUST DON'T ENGAGE.

SKYDRIVERDIVER - SURPLUS LAPDOG
MAIN JOB IS TO YELL 'YEAH' AND 'IN YOUR FACE' AND 'THATS RIGHT SUCKA' AFTER EVERYTHING SURPLUS SAYS.
THE ABSOLUTE STUPIDEST PERSON ON THIS ENTIRE BOARD. HE ONCE POSTED A FEW OF HIS OWN IDEAS AND THE POST WAS SO RIDDLED WITH SPELLING AND GRAMMATICAL ERRORS, NOT TO MENTION A COMPLETE INABILITY TO ARTICULATE WHY HE IS SO UPSET AT YOU, THAT HE WAS RELEGATED BACK TO THUG CHEERLEADER BEFORE THE RJC PEOPLE SUSPECTED A MANIACAL RETARD HAD INVADED THEIR VENUE.

FDJ, PLEASE LEARN THE SIMPLE LESSON THAT THEY HAVE BEEN TORTURING YOU WITH FOR SOME TIME NOW. PLEASE DON'T ENGAGE THEM. EVEN AFTER THEY LOSE THIS LAWSUIT IT WON'T END FOR THEM. IT WILL NEVER END FOR THEM. THE ONLY WAY THEY WIN IS TO BAIT YOU AND STICK YOU. IN A WAY IT IS SERVING THE PURPOSE THEY SEEK WHICK IS TO GET BACK AT THE BASTARDS WHO MADE IT AND LEFT THEM BEHIND. YOU'VE GOT OT STOP HELPING THEM DO THAT FOR YOUR OWN SAKE.

JUST SAY NO.

 

[Boeingman]

When does this come before the court? Is ALPA seeking attorney fees if they prevail?

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Clown,

I've tried to stay away...Oh Lord, how I've tried! But then I find myself reading their propaganda, and realizing that many on this board are new to the industry and forming their own opinions, and I can't seem to let the rjdc's lies go unanswered.

My wife tells me the same thing. I have a hard time letting someone who is wrong have the last word. It's a personality flaw, but I'm working on it. Admittiing it is the first step, so they say.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Sounds more like Surplus 1 to me. However, it is somewhat entertaining to listen over and over to the "woe is me" victim wail that is so prevalent on these threads. Yep, it's definitely all the mainline pilots do and think about, especially with all that is currently wrong in the industry today...how to keep the regional pilot down.

Trainer,

Did you get your latest copy of How to keep the Regional Pilots Down: An ALPA guide for mainline pilots? I got my copy, but I haven't had too much time to read it. I was too busy reading my furlough notice and press releases of all of DCI's new service.


If we are trying to keep them down, then we SUCK at it!

 

[csmith]

Trainer,

Did you get your latest copy of How to keep the Regional Pilots Down: An ALPA guide for mainline pilots? I got my copy, but I haven't had too much time to read it. I was too busy reading my furlough notice and press releases of all of DCI's new service.


If we are trying to keep them down, then we SUCK at it!

I agree with the previous posters, FDJ. You are just banging your head against the wall here. I'm sure you have noticed my much less participation here--for that very reason. Ole' Surplus has found his big fish in the little pond locale where he thinks he can alter the opinion of young, impressionable aviators into his way of martyring. Funny how more and more the tide seems to be turning against him, but I digress. Fight on the ALPA boards. Many on here have no dog in the fight anyway, and at least on the ALPA boards people have to put their name to their posts.

C

still no announcement from the judge, and I can't imagine how that can be good for RJDC folk

 

[abenaki]

ClownPilot,

Quoting you.....


SURPLUS- NEAR THE END OF HIS CAREER AND BITTER HE NEVER AMOUNTED TO ANYTHING BUT REALIZES HE CAN'T ACT OUT AGGRESSIVELY SO HE HAS FOUND THE ONLY VENUE HE HAS TO RETALIATE. HE CHANGES SPOTS SO OFTEN YOU CAN NEVER REALLY PIN HIM DOWN. POSTS A LEGIBLE ARGUMENT AND SOMEWHAT SKILLFULLY TWISTS THE FACTS TO FIT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TO SAY. IN SHORT, HE WASTED HIS LIFE AND HE'S ANGRY AT THE MAINLINE GUYS AND NOW HE HAS FOUND A WAY TO STICK YOU IN THE RIBS. DON'T LET HIM. JUST DON'T ENGAGE.

I no longer have a dog in this fight (thank you, Lord) however, I do take strong exception to your characterization of someone whom you obviously do not know and have not known.

Quite some years ago, I personally knew Surplus1. I assume that you did not. While you have the right to disagree with his posts, your personal characterizations, conclusions about his career, his character, his motivations, and his life's accomplishments are not for you or anyone else on this board to judge. I found him a man to be respected and admired and not one whose life's work can be casually dispersed to the wind by someone who does not know the man. I know what he has done, I know how he has contributed to his profession and those around him. You draw conclusions about someone whom you do not know.

What right do you have to judge another whom you do not know? Shall I start making gross generalizations and defining the character of you or FDJ or anyone else on this board based on their writings?


I cannot assure you that Surplus1 should not more be characterized as bitter anymore than FDJ should be. They are two men engaged in a struggle presented to them in life. And I think it will matter less what the outcome is of this whole debacle, but more on how each is judged by his actions of honesty, integrity and respect (or lack thereof).

And how will you, CLownpilot, be judged....as you readily judge others? For your sake, I would hope not....

 

[Typhoon1244]

Forgive me if I bring up a subject that's already been covered...I've about gone blind from trying to read this whole thread.

I've already said I don't have a problem with furloughed Delta guys flying at ASA/Comair. Heck, I wish we could find a flying job for everybody who got furloughed (as long as I don't get displaced, of course--I'm kinda selfish that way).

I do have two questions about furloughed Delta pilots who get to keep their Delta numbers while at ASA:

(1) Will they be allowed to vote on our contract when the time comes?

(2) Should they?

I grant you, we're not talking about a lot of votes here...but I think the potential conflict of interest raises some interesting questions.

 

[surplus1]

Part 1 of 2

Holy Cow 100LL!
Surplus' quote, .... It, and statements like it, are designed only to garner sympathy from your peers and to blame us for whatever shortcomings you perceive in your contract.

FDJ,

Three things: 1) Never mind that the Clown is criticizing you for participating. You have something to say that is worthy of being read. Although you and I disagree on the issues, you have refrained from personal attacks and slurs and conducted your self like a gentleman. I respect you for that, far more than you know.

2) Our perspective is different and our views conflict. Nevertheless, the fact that you take the time to voice those views in a forum like this is, in my opinion, worthy of praise, not criticism. As you point out, the audience here is extremely diverse ranging from inexperienced pilots very new to the industry and unionism, to mature veteran aviators. The fact that we challenge each other in debate provides a valuable opportunity for them to review conflicting viewpoints from both sides of a highly complex and controversial airline issue. The world according to Surplus1, is by no means perfect. Neither is the world according to FlyDeltasJets. If nothing else, our debate may motivate those interested to study the issues for themselves and then form their own educated opinions. The audience should be exposed to different views.

3) You contribute much to the discussion as do many others and your point of view is beneficial to all of us, including me. I hope you will continue to express your ideas by continuing to post. Thank you for your efforts.
***************

What follows is a response to a message you directed to 100LL. It contained observations that generate this reply directly to you.

I don't mind your disagreeing with anything or everything that I say. I have a problem with your remarks only when you make statements or implications that misconstrue, intentionally or otherwise, what I have previously written. I do not blame you (pl.) for any shortcomings in our contract, perceived or otherwise. I have never even implied that. You are misrepresenting my beliefs. I'll state it directly: In my opinion, the Delta pilot group is in no way responsible for any shortcomings in the CMR PWA, perceived or real.

Unlike many, Surplus included, I have never stereotyped an entire pilot group by the actions of a few.

Begging your pardon, I have to disagree. I am guilty of stereotyping a group, not based "on the actions of a few", but based on the actions of their political leaders (which in most cases they clearly support). You sir, have done exactly the same thing. The last dozen or so of your posts have been dedicated to stereotyping the Comair group, due to an MEC decision that you dislike. Those same posts also threaten and entire group repeatedly, because it will not conform to your idea of how it should react. While I may have placed mainline pilots into a category due to their politics, I don't believe I ever threatened any of you. You threaten retaliation repeatedly and consistently. I urge you to reconsider that strategy. I will try to avoid stereotyping.

The regional contracts are FAR better with ALPA on the property than they were before ALPA.

That is a true statement. It is also a very misleading statement. Since there were no regional contracts before ALPA was on the property, it follows you are accurate. However, that does not mean that ALPA has been the panacea of good for regional pilots that you imply.

There are some good ALPA contracts at the regionals. There are, unfortunately, many more lousy contracts at the regionals. Should I then say that the regional contracts are far worse with ALPA on the property? I would be technically correct, just as you are, but I would also be as misleading as you are.

Those who like to blame ALPA for their woes forget that they are flying bigger airplanes to more destinations making way more money and growing faster than ever before.

You appear to imply that the facts in your statement are the result of ALPA's efforts on their behalf. That is also a misleading statement. Yes, regional pilots are flying bigger airplanes, etc. That however, has absolutely nothing to do with ALPA and has actually occurred despite the ALPA.

Regional pilots can thank management for the fact that they have any jets. ALPA has consistently opposed that ever since the day that Comair bought regional jet #1. ALPA has consistently sought to limit their introduction and their number at every regional airline. ALPA continues to do so in the present.

With equal irony, regional pilots can thank management for the fact that they are flying "bigger jets". ALPA has consistently opposed the larger regional jets from day one and continues to do so. ALPA's President has stated publicly that regional pilots should not be allowed to fly 70-seat jets and that 50-seats is the "natural" dividing line. [One could suspect he was the Pope invoking the doctrine of infallibility]. ALPA has tried and failed, to stop the proliferation of regional jets with 50-seats. ALPA has tried, and failed, to prevent the introduction at regional carriers of regional jets with more than 50-seats. ALPA has subsequently tried to negotiate them away from regional pilots, who are members of the ALPA, and transfer them to mainline pilots. ALPA has supported the efforts of non-ALPA unions to transfer 70-seat jets from members of ALPA whose interests it is charged with representing.

Acting on behalf of mainline pilots, ALPA has entered into agreements that are designed specifically to force the abrogation of regional pilot seniority and contracts in order to obtain preferential hiring of mainline pilots. ALPA has coerced regional pilots into accepting such onerous terms, and is actively doing so as we write.

ALPA has itself created an alter ego airline at USAir Group for the purpose of ensuring that regional pilots would be precluded from operating "medium regional jets" and "large regional jets" (terms coined by ALPA for that specific purpose), and to guarantee that those jobs would be preferentially filled by mainline pilots and denied to regional pilots who are members of ALPA. That alter ego airline violates the PWA of at least one regional carrier whose pilots are represented by ALPA.

ALPA, by its actions in opposition to regional pilots' operating bigger airplanes, has facilitated the creation of two non-union alter ego airlines; one of them on an ALPA property and the other on AFLCIO union property.

On the former property, the result has been the need for ALPA members to forego all feasible opportunity for contract improvement, in order to protect their jobs and seniority against the ALPA-facilitated alter ego. ALPA has expended large sums of money fighting the very alter ego that its policy helped to create. The net result will be a grossly inferior CBA at the affected ALPA carrier, a regional, and the coerced implementation of ALPA's Jets-for-Jobs protocol.

On the IBT property those IBT pilots are struggling to defend their union jobs, while ALPA remains conspicuously silent. Why? Because the jobs at the alter ego will go exclusively to mainline ALPA members, at the direct expense of the IBT regional pilots. One union (ALPA) literally stealing jobs from another union (IBT) and for what? So that mainline pilots may get those jet jobs, instead of the regional pilots that otherwise would.

ALPA has adamantly opposed the introduction of 90-seat regional jets, even where they were not prohibited by Scope clauses, alleging that only mainline pilots should fly them. While ostensibly negotiating on behalf of the regional pilots that would ultimately fly them and whose company has purchased them, ALPA is simultaneously negotiating on behalf of a mainline pilot group to prevent their introduction and operation.

On behalf of the Delta pilot group, ALPA has successfully negotiated to cap the introduction of 70-seat regional jets purchased by Comair and ASA (prior to their acquisition by Delta) while simultaneously ensuring that those "permitted" must be spread among as many as 5 different airlines, rather than the 2 regional airlines that originally purchased and optioned them. ALPA's action facilitates management's efforts at whipsaw, and directly reduces the career expectations and earning capacity of two separate, ALPA represented, pilot groups with over 3000 ALPA members.

At the same time, ALPA has introduced at Delta, limitations on 50-seat regional jet flying, spread over 4 ALPA carriers, that directly threaten the future career opportunities of other ALPA members at their own airlines. While doing so, ALPA has formally denied at least two of the affected regional pilot groups, the right to bargain with the controlling employer in their own behalf.

So, that part of your statement is not only misleading it is an outright contradiction of the truth.

Regional pilots, to a man, have fared much better with ALPA than without.

In the light of the foregoing, do tell me how it is that you see regional pilots as having "fared much better" as a consequence of their membership in the ALPA. Your perspective focuses, without evidence, on what ALPA has done for regional pilots. My perspective focuses, with supporting evidence, on what ALPA has done to regional pilots. If I am wrong, I invite you to refute the evidence provided.

Continued >

 

[surplus1]

Part 2 of 2

ALPA has given support to this struggle every step of the way, and to ignore their contributions in favor of petty and unfair accusations garners "imperceptibly low levels of empathy."

Support to whom? To the regional pilots that it represents or the mainline pilots that it represents? If you can refute any of what I said above, please do so. I would really like to see your arguments. If you can provide evidence of ALPA's support for the struggle of its regional members please do so. My definition of "support" is not satisfied by the mere provision of basic services for which all members pay dues.

"Petty and unfair accusations"? Tell me which one you think is petty and which one you think is unfair. I would truly like to know.

Maybe my statements do garner "imperceptibly low levels of empathy" (as you were accused of doing) among mainline pilots, but I risk believing that the picture is quite different among regional pilots. The only real problem I see is that many regional pilots appear to be afraid to speak out in their own behalf. I wonder why that is? Could it be because they are afraid of threats and recriminations similar to the ones that you have been making and fostering against Comair pilots?

By now you've probably figured out that I am one regional pilot who is NOT afraid to say what he thinks or tell it like it is. Luckily for me, there are many more regional pilots like me who also are not afraid. They are called Comair pilots. I would also recognize the many pilots at ASA that are not afraid to speak out and tell it as it is. One day we will all speak out and I for one, hope that day comes far sooner than later.

No one is out to get you, despite Surplus' rantings. He and his group, however, are out to get us.

I don't think that you are out to "get us", FDJ. I think you've already "got us" and it is our fault for not standing up to prevent it sooner. We are not out to get you, we are merely out to reverse what you have done and are trying to do to us, and to prevent it in the future.

While your math is typical of your general misunderstanding of the real world we both live in, we have indeed sued "our" union. Perhaps the current litigation will succumb to your predictions and fail in court. In that event, we won't have to wait long for the ALPA to provide another opportunity, at which point there will be another suit and then another, until such time as ALPA's failure to represent our interests is estopped and its DFR to regional pilot members enforced. We are not going to give up the struggle and vanish into the night so don't hold your breath on that account.

We have not sued to eliminate your scope clause so that Comair can take your airplanes. Bluntly, that is a fabrication of yours that you're trying to sell. We have sued to prevent your scope clause from taking our airplanes and with them our career expectations and our future earning potential. Our own Scope excludes you from nothing. Your Scope attempts to exclude us from our livelihoods.

If you think that this attack on our profession will not be met with an emotional response, you will be disappointed.

There's no attack on the profession, FDJ. The "profession" is ours as much as it is yours. You belong to a group of airline pilots; so do we. To attack ourselves would infer that we are stupid. Call us whatever you choose, but be assured we are not stupid. In reality, our action is not an attack at all, it is a defense. We are just trying to repel boarders. If you number yourself among the boarders, then you are subject to being repelled; not withstanding the extent of the emotional response. It is not your emotions that we are concerned about, it is your actions and those of our union.

These are very difficult issues and I readily confess that I am no less emotional in defense of my views than you are in defense of yours. Conflicts of this nature, more often than not, cause humans to emote.

Apparently, it is ok for those from the regional side of the fence to make "adolescent-flavored rants" and value judgements about mainline pilots, but when one of us vows to protect his own flying, he is being less than "politic."

For the record, Surplus1 does not accuse you of an adolescent-flavored rant. I take your remarks and opinions very seriously for I am well aware that they reflect clearly the general thought process of the group to which you belong. They are not ranting at all. They are a serious threat to our well being.

The Camel's nose is under our tent and the fox is in the hen house. Your associate csmith depicted your thought process quite accurately when he referred to us as remora. It is not at all flattering to be regarded as "suckerfish". Your collective opinions, reflect clearly your collective intent.

I don't expect that we can change that intent but we can do our very best to frustrate it. We're trying.

I would urge you to remain in the Association and join us in correcting the errors of its current policies. ALPA was a fine institution. It both can and should be restored to its intended purpose and you should help to do that rather than constantly threatening to leave, if you are unable to impose your will on others. Since you express the desire to "protect the profession", that might be a great way for you to start trying.

If ALPA is to become "the pilots union", then ALPA must begin by ensuring that it represents fairly the diverse interests of its diverse membership. It must be changed from an oligarchy to a real democracy. The cancer of political patronage by and to the wealthy must be cut out and destroyed. We could start the process by selecting statesmen to govern us, as opposed to politicians whose number one effort is not the preservation of our profession, but the preservation of their power.

Again, I am grateful for the opportunity to debate these issues with you and others.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

Surplus,

Thank you for the kind words.

I am leaving for a few days, so this will be short. My only response to you is that if ALPA had been successful with their efforts to keep jets at mainline, we would all be on the same side of the fence, and no one would be complaining about regional contracts. It is ironic, and very telling (if one takes the time to examine it) that you yourself thanked management for the fact that you have jets. Do you think mgt did that out of some altruistic need to help you? Or do you think it was far less expensive to give them to you, and therefore lowered the compensation of thousands of pilots and created a whipsaw.

You're darn right ALPA fought jets at carriers who do outsourced work. I only wish they had fought harder. We would all have been better off.

 

[100LL... Again!]

FDJ-

If I read your posts correctly, it looks like I have pretty much made you and Surplus1 two into pals. Nothing like having something to rally against.

My posts may seem to have animosity in them. None is intended.

My point was simply as I put it - my view is shared by more pilots than you think.

I, among others, are very apathetic to the current state of the profession. We are not jealous or angry. If I was jealous, I would be accusing you of ruining my chances to fly RJ's or some such.

What we are is weary. Many of no longer believe that anyone 'raising the bar' does any good for any other group. Historically, a great number of mainline pilots have held the view that Surplus1 first stated - that we are 'aspirants'. I could not agree more. A friend of mine jumpseating was told he was basically no better than an illegal immigrant (by the captain!).

As I also stated, I am sure you are individually a nice person. The group mentality that is exhibited by many mainline pilots though (this is not directed at you), often seems to descend into something more like thuggish rhetoric.

Pilots are, as a group, competitive, often arrogant, and keenly tuned to the pecking order. Those of us at the bottom have simply quit caring what goes on at the top since we do not perceive that those at the top really care what becomes of us.

I.e.: "You'll get your turn when you get your turn". This would be acceptable if this was truly the case, but it never works out that way. I do believe that some are trying to change the rules in the middle of the game.

This profession, in my OPINION, is not a 'brotherhood' of professional pilots. It is a society of cliques. Many, if not most, will disagree. I remain unconvinced that I am wrong, even though I wish I was. I'm tired, disillusioned, and just don't care.

Now back to my desk job.

 

[csmith]

FDJ-
Pilots are, as a group, competitive, often arrogant, and keenly tuned to the pecking order. Those of us at the bottom have simply quit caring what goes on at the top since we do not perceive that those at the top really care what becomes of us.

I.e.: "You'll get your turn when you get your turn". This would be acceptable if this was truly the case, but it never works out that way. I do believe that some are trying to change the rules in the middle of the game.

This profession, in my OPINION, is not a 'brotherhood' of professional pilots. It is a society of cliques. Many, if not most, will disagree. I remain unconvinced that I am wrong, even though I wish I was. I'm tired, disillusioned, and just don't care.

Now back to my desk job.

Hang on there sluggo,

IMO, the "those of us at the bottom" quote is super dangerous to be saying. Those of us at the bottom--included me, includes me, and will include me--need to be the ones at the forefront of what has happened, is happening, and will happen in the future. For it is we, or us, who will be doing the BOHICA when the time comes--long after the likes of Surplus and others have gone.

I get what your beef is. You feel as if nobody (esp ALPA) cares about the regionals, the only ones who anybody gives a hoot about are the Delta, UAL, NWA, FDX guys--the high dollar guys, etc.

#1 I disagree. The problem has its roots resting in your contracts--the very ones that the "haves'" managements are trying to emulate as we speak. You bring these contracts up to a Deltaesque style contract, and we are in business of removing this wedge which allows management to run all of these fancy number alalysises with regard to how much cheaper you are than I am.

#2 Even if this were true, ALPA only cares about the big contracts, this is what the regionals were INTENDED to do in the first place. ALPA bought into this "we need to outsource some flying so that we can make money in certain markets via cheaper labor", and we are no longer at that point. I have no argument against the fact that ALPA dropped the ball, but aside from that, the regionals were set up as a stepping stone/cheaper labor/crummier contract kind of place. It was meant to be their niche. Now some want to change the rules, but they want to do it at the expense of others--namely the ones who allowed the proliferation of their existence in the first place. I certainly have no qualms with somebody not having to go through what I went through to get where I am, but to do it at my expense is not couth, and unacceptable. You find a way to do it for free, I'm all ears. Not possible. There are simply those out there, some even on this board <gasp> who simply will use perceived leverage in order to further their own career, coming at the expense of others. They "will not be intimidated" by the more powerful MECs. They have all of the answers, and the rest of the world is just wrong. Worst of all, they try to drag the industry down with them, and prey upon the younger, more inexperienced pilots with their self-serving rhetoric.

Mark this day down as an "I told you so" hould the RJDC claim victory, because it will be a race to the bottom. There are people who do care about the have nots. I am one of them. Everybody is at the bottom many times in their career. I was at GLA, then at Eagle, then at TSA, then TWA, then Delta, then f/o checkout at Delta, then CA checkout at Delta, soon to be 76ER f/o at Delta, someday again CA at Delta. The key is to preserve those jobs at the top, because you too will be there someday--if you desire.

C

 

[surplus1]

Surplus,
My only response to you is that if ALPA had been successful with their efforts to keep jets at mainline, we would all be on the same side of the fence, and no one would be complaining about regional contracts.

If that were so, it would be a good thing, but sadly it isn't so. We the regional pilot groups in ALPA would merely be deeper in the gutter than today and more opressed than ever. Remember, I date from the time when there were no regional jets. ALPA's treatment of its regional membership was worse then, than it is now. Remember too, that every ALPA member, regardless of the type of aircraft that he happens to pilot, is an airline pilot and a member of the profession. Keeping jets a mainline will solve nothing. It is already too late for that option. Representing all members fairily, is the only viable solution.

When the then sitting ALPA president attempted to improve the lot of regional members it did not cause a change. Instead, it cost him the loss of mainline support and therefore, his job. The current president of ALPA bends to the will of the Big MEC's like a reed in the wind. That will allow him to keep his job, but he may well loose his union.

Conisidering who dominates the governance of the ALPA and the system, devoid of checks and balances, they have devised to maintain their absolute power, ALPA will not change voluntarily.

Replacing the power structure would require the replacement of at least the Big 6 airline MECs. That isn't going to happen. Therefore, only a court order will impel the ALPA to comply with its Duty of Fair Representation.

It is ironic, and very telling (if one takes the time to examine it) that you yourself thanked management for the fact that you have jets.

It is indeed ironic, which is exactly what I said. Had our union seen fit to devise a system that would propel the combining of mainline/regional groups within the airline system of which we were a part, management would not have been able to take advantage of ALPA's discriminatory practices for they would not have existed.

They took us all to the cleaners because our powerful union leaders dispised their lesser brothers and intentionally decided to exclude rather than include them. That greedy decison opened the door and management has exploited it ever since. Make no mistake about it. Management did not do this to ALPA. ALPA did this to itself, and we are all paying the price of our own dereliction of duty to each other.

Do you think mgt did that out of some altruistic need to help you? Or do you think it was far less expensive to give them to you, and therefore lowered the compensation of thousands of pilots and created a whipsaw.

No, I know it was not altruistic on the part of management. It was merely clever. Yes, it was far less expensive to give them to us. What is truly amazing is that ALPA, by virtue of its prejudice toward regional members, did everything in its power to maintain our "cheap" status and substandard agreements. ALPA did not want us to be equal or near equal and never made a sincere effort to make it so. Why ... because the powerful upper class would find their absolute power challenged just as soon as the low class rose to middle class status.

You'll probably say that's hog wash and untrue. That would not suprise me. IMO, the reason you would think that way is because you have bought the ALPA myth and you really believe that you are members of an upper class that should be separate from the rest. Unless you have had the opportunity to participate in negotiations at a regional carrier, there is no way than you can really understand what takes place and how truly small any effort on the part of ALPA to raise the bar at the regionals has actually been.

I could reveal a series of sorded details and smoking guns to substantiate my views, but this is not the time nor the place. To do so would be more detrimental to ALPA than any benefit derived. Contrary to your belief FDJ, we are not trying to destroy the Association. What we are trying to do is change it. Hopefully we can accomplish that before it is too late. If we fail, I predict that ALPA as we know it will eventually implode.

You often threaten that Delta pilots will leave ALPA if they do not get their way. I can tell you from first hand experience that you are not the only Delta pilot that makes that threat. Many is the time that the Delta group has in fact "got its way" by making that same threat, at much higher pay grades than yours.

I hope you don't leave. Not because I would miss you for I would not. However, ALPA could not sustain itself financially, in its present form, in the event of a Delta exodus. I value the Association enough to tolerate your intransigence, up to a point, to avoid that. As it were, you are the lesser of two evils.

Something else that you should consider before you push too far, is the possibility that regional member groups may themselves decide to leave ALPA, if ALPA does not modify its modus operandi. While the exodus of the regionals would not destroy the union financially, it would destroy it politically. "The pilots union" would cease to exist. The charade of representing "all airline pilots" would end, and the ALPA would be revealed to the world as the "mainline pilots country club" that it actually is.

Without the little people to control and dominate, the Big 6 would soon turn against each other, and one-by-one, in relatively short order, you would destroy ALPA from within.

Could regional pilots form and sustain their own union? You bet we could! We would not be able to support a plethora of high-living union executives and bureaucrats, but with nearly 16,000 members we could most certainly support a lean, mean, fighting machine that could easily take you on. We are already accustomed to Motel 6 in contrast to the Hyatt Regency or L'Enfant Plaza. The high cost of ALPA's top heavy structure would not be required. We would not need a President whose salary parallels that of the US President. We would not need to employ one lawyer, who wins few cases, at a salary higher than the annual budget of the ASA MEC. We could make it.

We would no longer have to deal with the current conflicts of interest. You all could be left to stew in your own milieu of sharks feeding on each other. We remora would find another place to scavange in our own interests rather than following you sharks wherever you choose to swim while hoping you won't get hungry enough to eat us. It has potential.

Be careful what you ask for, you might get it. In the history of human interaction, those abused too long by their masters, have always risen and freed themselves. The masters did not fare well in the process. I respectfully submit it is much easier to treat us fairly and discontinue the hegemony.

You're darn right ALPA fought jets at carriers who do outsourced work. I only wish they had fought harder. We would all have been better off.

You already know my position on subcontracting of work. I'm against it. You and I simply have a different way of defining it. I wish that ALPA had fought outsourced work as you claim that it has, but the record proves otherwise. ALPA did not fight outsourcing, FDJ. ALPA created outsoucing. What ALPA tried to fight was the deployment of regional jets. It failed miserably.

As recently as a few months back, and with 16-year pilots on the street. ALPA quadrupled outsourcing at USAir Group, creating a debacle in the process, simultaneously abrogating regional seniority and contracts. I acknowledge they had to do something, but what they did most definitely wasn't it. The mess that decision created is in its infancy and will haunt us for a very long time.

Had ALPA chosen to adopt an inclusive policy for ALL its members, instead of the exclusive Scope it fosters even now, in the face of collapsing airlines, we would all be better off. ALPA chose not to do so, and continues on the same flawed course despite repeated failure of its policies.

While we decry the ineptitude and failing business plans of airline managers, we emulate them by continueing to pursue the equally flawed union plan of our own creation. The legacy carriers are all failing for the same reasons, yet they continue to the very brink while resisting change. The union, is doing the very same thing at the Big 6. If we do not adapt to the changing business we are in, the Big 6 airlines will collapse and the Big 6 divisions of ALPA (the major airline MEC's) will follow them down the tube. If that is what you want, stay your present course.

It is not what I want.

 

[surplus1]

FDJ-

If I read your posts correctly, it looks like I have pretty much made you and Surplus1 two into pals. Nothing like having something to rally against.

Nope, you are innocent. It was that fellow with the multi-colored suit and the big red nose. Besides, I prefer to duel with an epee than a wad of spittle. Touche' just seems to have more class than Mofukr.

Fear not, until FDJ becomes a convert he remains and adversary. He's just a "nicer" adversary than some.

 

[Clownpilot]

Whoops

I know Surplus only from the lengthy posts he makes and the ideas he espouses.

However, I accept your criticism as an axiom as you are in a better place to judge his merits.

So, to you I say fair enough.

ClownPilot,


Quite some years ago, I personally knew Surplus1. I assume that you did not. While you have the right to disagree with his posts, your personal characterizations, conclusions about his career, his character, his motivations, and his life's accomplishments are not for you or anyone else on this board to judge. I found him a man to be respected and admired and not one whose life's work can be casually dispersed to the wind by someone who does not know the man. I know what he has done, I know how he has contributed to his profession and those around him. You draw conclusions about someone whom you do not know.

 

[100LL... Again!]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark this day down as an "I told you so" hould the RJDC claim victory, because it will be a race to the bottom. There are people who do care about the have nots. I am one of them. Everybody is at the bottom many times in their career. I was at GLA, then at Eagle, then at TSA, then TWA, then Delta, then f/o checkout at Delta, then CA checkout at Delta, soon to be 76ER f/o at Delta, someday again CA at Delta. The key is to preserve those jobs at the top, because you too will be there someday--if you desire.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps I should clarify my position. I am not particularly swayed one way or another on the RJDC issue. I AM, however, interested in the issue of the Delta furloughees and CMR. I do believe that a political football has been made of the issue, possibly by both sides. I believe the Delta MEC shoulders a significant portion of the blame. It does seem that their "We're all in this together" attitude is a fairly new development.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The key is to preserve those jobs at the top, because you too will be there someday--if you desire.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


I don't even know where to start on this one. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you really believe this. Yes, jobs will be available again someday at the majors. How long do you expect others to wait for this fairy tale to come true? Five years? Ten?

AND: We ALL know the truth - that luck and fortunate timing has as much to do with getting a job at the majors as anything else. Anyone who denies this is beyond reaching with reason. A chance at a job someday is little incentive. I'm just not buying it. I'll believe it when I see guys getting flow-through numbers.

 

[csmith]

Perhaps I should clarify my position. I am not particularly swayed one way or another on the RJDC issue. I AM, however, interested in the issue of the Delta furloughees and CMR. I do believe that a political football has been made of the issue, possibly by both sides. I believe the Delta MEC shoulders a significant portion of the blame. It does seem that their "We're all in this together" attitude is a fairly new development.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I know, there is no "we are in this together development with the Delta MEC--just ALPA national. You can shoulder the responsibility with them if you wish. I would agree that they are responsible for letting these guys have the careers they have and opening the loophole through which management ran, but as for the hard feelings, that comes from a group of pilots who are trying to exploit this lack of foresight for their own gain at the Delta pilots expense.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I don't even know where to start on this one. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you really believe this. Yes, jobs will be available again someday at the majors. How long do you expect others to wait for this fairy tale to come true? Five years? Ten?

AND: We ALL know the truth - that luck and fortunate timing has as much to do with getting a job at the majors as anything else. Anyone who denies this is beyond reaching with reason. A chance at a job someday is little incentive. I'm just not buying it. I'll believe it when I see guys getting flow-through numbers. [/B]

I expect others to wait their turn as others had to. If they get a break before "others" did, so be it. If they get a break because they stepped on the backs of people who deserve their place on the Delta seniority list, well, I'll stop short.

You want truth? I knew nobody at Delta--just a lowly civilian kid from 4 other airlines, who studied on the road on his overnights to get his 4 year via correspondence. Worked two jobs while in the regionals to pay the mortgage. Spent 91-96 at the low life jobs--people have it good these days--before "lucking out" to get my place at Delta. My story is not unique. There are thousands out there. So for you to tell me that I have lack of reason, when I say hard work and persistence are the keys, tells me you just don't know the work ethic it takes. I don't think your way is unique either. I can see it in many of the "younger" pilots these days. They want something for nothing. They want the promise of a great job for little or no work to get it. The "Generation Y" of the piloting profession.

Incidentally, you probably won't see a flow through any time soon. It was proposed by the Delta MEC, the ones you blame, and summarily rejected by the Comair and ASA MECs as not good enough. Kind of that perceived leverage thing. Suffice to say that I don't believe you are well enough informed on this topic.

C

 

[100LL... Again!]

First of all, I am glad you got your job the 'old fashioned way.'

I FULLY expect to wait my turn in this field, and would not have it any other way.

My point was that previous attitudes held have created an atmosphere of distrust, and while I think there is no justifiable reason for Comair to deny employment to the furloughed pilots, I also can sympathize with the Comair pilots for feeling like they have no incentive for pushing management for same.

I would be very interested in the proposed terms of the flow through, which I believe was mentioned without specifics. I would be quite surprised if it constituted a real flow. The term 'preferential hiring' was what I heard. That can be a very different thing.

 

[csmith]

First of all, I am glad you got your job the 'old fashioned way.'

I FULLY expect to wait my turn in this field, and would not have it any other way.

My point was that previous attitudes held have created an atmosphere of distrust, and while I think there is no justifiable reason for Comair to deny employment to the furloughed pilots, I also can sympathize with the Comair pilots for feeling like they have no incentive for pushing management for same.

I would be very interested in the proposed terms of the flow through, which I believe was mentioned without specifics. I would be quite surprised if it constituted a real flow. The term 'preferential hiring' was what I heard. That can be a very different thing.

Thanks. Mind you, I am not patting myself on the back. Like I said, there are a million stories like mine out there. I just don't buy the argument, pretty much from those who don't have the job, that it is luck. Indeed, it isn't.

Anyway, I'll be the first to admit that some of the attitudes from my fellow Delta guys make me cringe as well, and I too had the stereotype in mind when I arrived on the property. Fortunately, after a couple of years, your skills will have degraded enough and theirs improved enough so that you can't tell the difference!! TIC

The flow through--was indeed offered. The actual events are heresay, so I won't go into them again. Nonetheless, it was not considered, changed, or really even addressed by the Comair and ASA MECs. Apparently, they felt it wasn't even worth considering. Additionally, negotiating capital was set up in C2K in order to explore career enhancements for the wholly owned DCI pilots. Of course, they felt that this entitled them to come sit at the table with our negotiators for C2K. Some other well rehashed events played themselves out, and the idea was scrapped.


Again, I really feel that the Delta MEC will work with the Comair and ASA MECs, but it will have to be on the terms of the group with the leverage--the Delta pilots--who materially stand to gain little while the Comair and ASA pilots have the world to gain. Such terms do not constitute cart blanche for the Delta pilots, but I firmly believe some bodies feel that they have more leverage than they do, and the Delta MEC is going to let them run with it until reality pulls them back down to earth. Indeed it will.

Again, just my opinion. Thanks for the response.

C

 

[surplus1]

I would be very interested in the proposed terms of the flow through, which I believe was mentioned without specifics.

100LL,

The recurring statements from the Delta group alleging that "a flow through was offered" are a myth. There are no "proposed terms" to show you because a specific proposal has never been made.

In conjunction with BOD sessions, the Delta MEC did participate on several occasions in ALPA sponsored meetings, along with then current Delta codeshare partners. Flow through was part of ALPA's agenda at the time (and it was always "floated" to the group by an ALPA national functionary). The subject was discussed in very general terms only. No proposal was ever made by the Delta MEC during those discussions. It was one of those "ALPA things", that everyone attended somewhat reluctantly, including the Delta MEC.

Subsequent to the signing of the Eagle flow through. The Delta MEC Chairman invited the Comair MEC Officers to a meeting held at 1625 Mass. Ave., in DC. No advance agenda was announced.

When the Comair MEC arrived, it was discovered that the Delta MEC was accompanied by its "attorney", which had not been anticipated. As they sat down at the table, the attorney pushed (literally) a copy of the Eagle flow through across the table and said -- read this and see if you are interested. That's why we came. The response from the Comair MEC was "we have already read that and we are not interested in anything like it." The document was returned. Almost immediately, the Delta MEC concluded the meeting and left. There was no discussion of anything else.

During the 1998 BOD, ALPA held its usual "meeting" between Delta MEC and the codeshare partners. [These gatherings are informal and the only agenda is the one that ALPA creates but does not supply to the participants.] At the time the included regionals were CMR, ASA and BEX. The flow through concept was introduced by ALPA again. [They do that every time because someone in the ALPA administration has decided that if some regionals want a flow through, then all regionals want a flow through. I suspect the truth is that ALPA wants a flow through.]

Comair voiced the opinion that a flow through between Delta and 4 code share partners (ASA, BEX, CMR, & SKYW) would require the agreement of 5 independent airline managements, plus 5 separate MEC's. The prospect of any agreement between so many people appeared totally impractical. Comair had no particular interest. ASA was luke warm. BEX was willing to agree to anything. SKYW (non-union) was not present and none of us, including the Delta MEC, had the slightest idea of what our management's positions might be.

A few months after the BOD, the Delta MEC invited the same group to a meeting in ATL. Again, there was no advance agenda for the meeting. All of the regionals sent representatives. This meeting was also attended by two Delta MEC lawyers, two high ranking ALPA bureaucrats, Delt's Executive Council EVP. the chairman of DeltaMEC's codeshare committee (now Delta MEC Chairman), and the Officers of the Delta MEC, plus a few other Delta people.

At the opening of the meeting, the DMEC Chairman presented the other MEC Chairmen with copies of a pre-prepared press release, outlining what had been "agreed to" in the meeting. The Comair MEC objected, in that nothing had been agreed to about anything and said it did not concur with the content of the press release. ASA and SKYW supported CMR's view and the advance press release died. That created a somewhat tense atmosphere.

Next came the Delta MEC's so-called flow through proposal. It was not a written proposal or even a verbal proposal, but a repeat "float" of the same idea that had been previously rejected by the Comair MEC -- an Eagle-type flow through. There was no actual proposal and no specific proposal was made by the DMEC at any time during the meeting. Anyone who says that there was or implies that there was a proposal, is not telling the truth. Either because he doesn't know or has been misinformed by someone.

Comair MEC raised the same concerns, i.e., 1) how do you get 10 seperate groups to agree to a flow through? 2) Assuming the 4 regionals all agree, what are the mechanics? 3) How will we determine who flows first? 4) Wouldn't we have to merge our lists before we could determine the flow order or the flow-back sequence? Etc., etc., etc. In other words, what are we really talking about? No one had any answers.

SKYW asked how they might be included. The Delta Chairman responded by saying that it was "primarily for union pilots." The SKYW representative then said, -- Since we are non-union, why are we even here? We are not interested in that.

The BEX Chairman said that his airline had been purchased by AMR and would merge with Eagle, so he didn't care one way or the other.

Delta MEC Chair then said - Well, are you people interested in this or not? Comair -- We told you before and we tell you again, Comair has no interest whatever in an Eagle-like flow through. If there is nothing new, we are not interested. BEX- We don't care, it doesn't matter to us. SKYW -- we are not interested in anything that is for union pilots only. ASA - we agree with Comair.

At that point, one of the Delta folks said - well we don't really care either. If you don't want it that way that's OK with us, but you'll regret it. And by the way, you better understand that we intend to take those 70-seaters and fly them at Delta, so maybe you better think again.

Comair said - beg your pardon, what did you say? Answer - You heard me, we intend to take the 70-seaters. (At that point in time Comair had 20 firm orders + 70 options for the CL700 -- none delivered.)

Comair said -- Well, if you try to take our 70-seaters, that will mean you are declaring war against us. Delta response -- Call it whatever you want.

Shortly thereafter we were able to agree on a much revised press release that said nothing of substance but reported that the meeting had taken place with a positive spin. We had dinner together that night, but nothing changed. The next morning we all went home.

Much afterwards another meeting took place again in Atlanta. I don't know what exactly happened in that meeting, but I do know that the Delta MEC never made any specific flow-through proposal. I also know that the Comair and ASA MEC's have never changed their positions, not withstanding that there has been a substantial turnover of elected representatives and MEC Chairmen at both airlines.

In my personal opinion, all past flow-throughs implemented to date have been injurious to the affected regional pilots. All official flow through proposals or models to date, have been or would be detrimental to the regional pilots.

Flow through, as implemented or as proposed to date, gives preference to senior pilots at the affected regional, at the expense of junior pilots at the regional, the overwhelming majority of whom will never "flow" anywhere, yet become subject to being furloughed.

At regional carriers that operate both jets and turboprops, all ALPA proposed flow throughs discriminate against the turboprop pilots, making them 3rd class citizens in their own airline.

Flow up goes to the bottom of the mainline list. Flow back comes to the top of the regional list. Flow back permits the most junior mainline FO's, some of whom may have been there for as little as a month, to displace into the Captain position at the regional, allowing displacement of the regional's most senior pilots, stopping upgrades at the regional and forcing the furlough of its most junior pilots.

All flow throughs have allowed "off the street" hiring at the mainline to contnue unabated while the regional pilots wait in the wings for invented ratios to be implemented. Flow backs never include ratios or any waiting by mainline pilots.

ASA and Comair combined have over 3000 pilots. If we could agree with Delta to the "perfect flow through", whatever that may be, how long do you think it would be before all of us flow? If ASA/CMR merge there lists by DOH to make this happen, what will YOUR number be, and when will your turn to flow come? Since ASA has a bunch of turboprops and Comair has none, how would a "jet Captains only" flow through affect ASA pilots?

There is no practical or realistic way to resolve the issues that arise when a single "mainline carrier" operates or codeshares with several regional carriers, unless the seniority lists of the regional carriers are first merged together. Wherever there is more than one regional involved, the whole idea is unworkable.

There is nothing "good" for regional pilots about any of these one-sided deals. In their current or past formats, their true purpose is furlough protetion for the mainline, period.

When there are several separate regionals with separate seniority lists, I won't say its impossible, but the odds are against it. Also, a model acceptable to a regional like Comair or ASA, would require such revisionary thinking on the part of the Delta pilot group as to be highly improbable.

If we can devise an acceptable flow through model, it would be no more diffult to merge our lists. The practicality of that is remote at best. Even if we were "willing" the Company is not.

Rhetoric about allegedly rejected flow throughs should be seen by regional pilots for what it is, i.e., political propaganda, designed to influence the new hires to push for something that in fact would never apply to them.