Scope, RJ's and unions

[Publishers]

GoldenTrout

You seem to understand the problem.

Here was the original thought process:

To have dedicated feeders and maintain quality standards, we need to own our own regionals. The reason being that we need to guarantee them fixed income so we might as well own them and be paying ourselves for the non profitable feed system. That we we can also dicatate the quality and standards we want set.

While that was a great concept when things were always going up and markets were growing, the hazards only became apparent when scope and other issues started creating havoc. The Comair strike said to all of them, heh we are being held hostage by the guys we are paying to feed us. That and the rules that our pilots want kill our own flexibility to respond to market changes.

This is the very short version of the change in direction that recently occured and is being shaped now.

Whio is to say that maybe Delta's flying is really Comair's/

 

[michael707767]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Instead of

Well, that will be something to deal with if/when it happens. I don't see our MEC signing off on it--yes they will have to sign off on it. I would hope they learned their lesson in this area.

I will point out that any new airplane on the Delta property will likely have compensation set by an arbitraitor. Thanks to the loss of 3.B.6, our compensation lives will be in his hands. He does have some mandatory direction, however, and I have reasonable confidence in our built-in protections there.

Actuallly, I don't think the MEC will get to sign off on any subsidiary, as long as its Delta pilots under the current PWA. And as you have said, any new airplane will have the pay and work rules set by an arbitrator. Even with the guidance spelled out in the contract, I would not be surprised to see pay rates and work rules well below what we have on current aircraft.

 

[enigma]

[B
If you were management , who would you deal with?

1. A group of pilots who continually want to work less, for more money, and threaten to strike every time there are contract negotiations, and who limit the profitability of the company with scope clauses.

or

2. A non-company pilot group who will do the same job for half the cost, like it, and don't even know what a scope clause is.

We've done it to ourselves.

[/B]

The real issue here is one that asks; why has group two decided to act in this manner?

I propose that they do so largly in an effort to enable themselves individually, a future opportunity to join group one. The "I love flying so much" argument doesn't adequately explain why highly trained/skilled professionals are so willing to work for the wages/benefits that group two currently work for, not does it explain why they work under oppressive work rules. I guarantee you, that when the pot of gold at rainbows end truly disappears, so will the pool of pilots willing to work those entry level jobs with a poverty pay scale.

Managers who currently plan to take advantage of an overstocked pilot supply, must begin to plan now for how best to operate once that supply dries up. As someone else posted, the supply of MD's is starting to thin, and so will the supply of pilots once the top end wages disappear.

Managers has had access to a full pool of pilots for so long, that I don't really think that any manager really understands just how much his airline has been subsidized by the hopes and dreams of aspiring pilots.


regards,
8N

 

[Rvrrat]

Managers who currently plan to take advantage of an overstocked pilot supply, must begin to plan now for how best to operate once that supply dries up.

I would wager that the human race will be extinct before an "understock" condition occurs. Man had dreampt of flight for centuries before it became feasable. No where in history can I find a period of time when there were less people willling to fly than machines available, nor a time when there have been more jobs than applicants.

 

[goldentrout]

Enigma

I initially agreed with you assessment about the pilot pool drying up.

But after I thought about it, I tend to think there will always be pilots in group 2.

The analogy I use is one from the Air Force.

In the mid 90s, the AF Academy was actually having trouble filling its quota of sending people to pilot training, mainly becausue the commitment was raised to 10 years. However, instead of this having the desired effect of having AF management rethink the 10 year commitment, they just went out to ROTC and found more than enough people to fill the pilot training slots, without having to lower the commitment.

While the analogy may not exactly match the airline situation, the point is that I believe that as long as cockpits are available, people will leave their desk jobs for those opportunities. The lure of flying is strong. No facts here, just a sense.

 

[FlyingSig]

Re: So what is next?

Excellent topic! But after reading most of the replies here, I still have one question. Many mainline guys seem to feel that when times get better, their contract will go back to status quo. I can not imagine Leo or any other CEO going back to the old restrictive scope language.

Any mainline pilot that thinks this is in error. The scope resets are permanent due to the consecutive loosing quarters clasue. The only obligation Delta has for the remainder of the working agreement is to "meet and confer" with ALPA. DCI is free to expand as fast an Bombardier can make airplanes. This will not change when force majeur ends.

 

[michael707767]

Re: Re: So what is next?

Any mainline pilot that thinks this is in error. The scope resets are permanent due to the consecutive loosing quarters clasue. The only obligation Delta has for the remainder of the working agreement is to "meet and confer" with ALPA. DCI is free to expand as fast an Bombardier can make airplanes. This will not change when force majeur ends.

I think you are probably right. So, basically we are back to the scope clause of 96, where they can have unlimited RJs, except for the limits on the 70 seaters.

 

[surplus1]

Re: Re: Re: So what is next?

I think you are probably right. So, basically we are back to the scope clause of 96, where they can have unlimited RJs, except for the limits on the 70 seaters.

The "except for" is one of the major problems. Those aircraft represented a major slice of our career progression and affect our compensation across the board. Until the 70-seat restriction is restored to what it was in the DAL 96 contract (with respect to ASA and Comair), the dispute will continue. That simply has to go, one way or another.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

I wouldn't count on it.

 

[goldentrout]

FlyDeltajets

It is apparent from your ratings that you apparently have some experience in this industry, and are maybe plugged into people "in the know."

I originally started this thread asking for info on what's being discussed/proposed as far as Delta/Comair/ASA/Scope, etc.

Instead of "I wouldn't count on it," how about enlightening us on what you know or have heard.

 

[goldentrout]

Here's an excerpt from a recent interview with Mr. Berthune (CEO Continental).

-------------------------------------------------

"Bethune's aim now is to "lose less than the others so that we go on longest". Continental and low-cost arrier Southwest were the only two major US airlines to make a profit last year. This year Continental will probably make round a $600m loss.

British Airways' former partner, US Airways, has already filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and the pugnacious Bethune is dying for United to go the same way - either so he can buy it or so he can watch the major chunk of the surplus capacity now dogging the industry taken out overnight.

United, naturally, does not agree and Wall Street analysts believe it can probably survive if the unions - who, according to one observer "have absolute leverage" - accept large pay cuts.

United re-formed as an employee-owned company eight years ago. Sources inside and outside the company say that this has led to over-generous pay rises and a flabby cost structure that was always going to be unsustainable but has now taken the company to the brink.

A senior United captain earns $300,000 a year, compared with $200,000 at Continental. Earlier this year United's pilot union was asking for a 37 per cent pay rise. As things stand they are now negotiating pay cuts, but will not agree to the 20 per cent demanded by management. United needs to cut $2.5bn in costs and win a $1.8bn government loan guarantee to avoid collapse.

Bethune said: "Will it go in an orderly manner, like US Airways, or remain complacent like Swissair right up to the moment the guy won't put any kerosene in your jet unless you pay him in cash?"

While airline negotiations between unions and management usually rely on a lot of bluff and brinkmanship, financial analysts say the major airlines really are in trouble this time.

One Wall St analyst said: "The airlines have been in denial for a long time but now they are not crying wolf; the management are really scared and the unions just don't seem to get it."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm especially intrigued by what the article says about employee ownership of United, and the last paragraph from a Wall Street Analyst.

All these mainline guys who think business is just going to continue as usual are either:

1. In denial (which is the first step on the road to recovery after being faced with a tragic loss)
2. Ignorant...as the article says...they just don't get it.
3. A heck of alot smarter than the rest of us, because they apparently have a magical solution that they are keeping from the rest of us, which will preserve the status quo.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

GT,

I don't have any friends in high places, so I don't have any true "inside information." However, I have always been interested in this industry (like most on this board) and I have always been a pretty big reader. In addition to those traits I have a bit of a thirst for info that has me calling higher-ups in the union and the company almost daily (I can be kind of a pain in thier necks (or lower!)). Because of this, I do consider myself relatively well informed. Despite this, I am more often than not surprised by company or union announcements. Because of this, I try to make it clear that most of my posts and predictions are based on opinion rather than fact.

I cannot answer your question about scope any more clearly than I have in the thousands of words I have posted in the past. Based on my perception of the mood of my pilot group and my interpretation of previous court rulings regarding DFR cases, I do not see our restriction of the limits on outsourced 70-seaters getting lifted. Others may disagree. We'll see soon enough who is correct.

 

[Publishers]

Going on

There are so many things going on right now, answers will be difficult to predict for no one knows really what the basic corporate structure will be a year from now.

As you know, the airlines are returning to the congressional well looking for additional bailout funds. These are likely to be denied regardless of the argument.

The smaller companies surrounding the industry have been hit even harder.

I have said scope is dead because it has proved to be very helpful to either side. You can argue all day long over it and say that it restricted the airlines from doing X but the fact is that they probalby did not want to do X anyway. At least until 9/11.

The impact of the current economic situation stands to last a long time and the means to deal with it an even longer term affair. The article above says it all. There has been denial of basic changes in economic structure. People say well Southwest should bring up the pay scales to our level. Well that level is killing the companies that have it so what is the likelyhood of that.

All that would happen then is a COEX or someone will start flying the routes with lower priced crews and aircraft. Change is here. It will be sometime before we figure it out.

 

[goldentrout]

FDJ

That all sounds fair enough.

Can you answer these two questions?

1. What exactly does your scope clause say about RJ flying/mainline flying ratios, and 50/70 seaters?

2. Do you agree with other posts in this thread that say all scope clauses are now void based on the fact that Delta had two consecutive quarterly losses?

3. Is the mood of your pilot group more

a. Let's work with Comair/ASA to figure out a solution to get everyone back to work ASAP, as more 50-70-90 seaters come on board, without sacrificing anyone's job.

or

b. We (Delta pilot group) will do whatver it takes to get our guys a job, and if that means putting members of other pilot groups within the company on the street, so be it.

 

[michael707767]

FDJ

Can you answer these two questions?

1. What exactly does your scope clause say about RJ flying/mainline flying ratios, and 50/70 seaters?

2. Do you agree with other posts in this thread that say all scope clauses are now void based on the fact that Delta had two consecutive quarterly losses?

3. Is the mood of your pilot group more

a. Let's work with Comair/ASA to figure out a solution to get everyone back to work ASAP, as more 50-70-90 seaters come on board, without sacrificing anyone's job.

b. We (Delta pilot group) will do whatver it takes to get our guys a job, and if that means putting members of other pilot groups within the company on the street, so be it.

Goldentrout, I hope FDJ responds to your post, but I would also like to respond.

1. I know exactly what our scope says via 50/70 seaters, the ratios, and the other limits, stage length, hub to hub flying, etc. I have it right here in front of me.

2. Though I made the comment, (I believe I said basically we are back to 96 scope other than limits on the 70 seaters). I realize that it is not 100% true. I never said it was. However, I stand by the statement. Other than the 70 seaters, because of the relief granted by the economic resets (and I'll post what it says if you want) I don't think management is hampered in any real way from deploying RJs to any market they need them in.

3. I believe the group is more like B. but waking up to reality and trending toward A.
Personally I have always believed we should have a single list. I don't think the company would go along though. However, I think if we have a single list, but allow the three companies to remain seperate, Delta may go along. I would be all for allowing more 70 seaters and even 90 seaters as long as it is used to get everyone back to work. (no I am not talking a setup like the USAir guys have)