~~~^~~~
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Posts
- 6,137
Huck:
Good post. The conversation between Bob Arnold and Bill Buergey went "what would you think of a flow through" and Bob replied, "we don't think very much of it." Our MEC's were talking and these communications broke down over scope.
A flow through is not the answer. Reference Continental Express and Eagle. A flow through does not address the problem of having six different companies performing Delta domestic narrow body flying. The only solution is one list. However, the power players within the Delta MEC are more concerned about getting jobs for their old squadron buddies than they are fixing the alter ego airline problem. In other words, ALPA members flying Delta passengers at Delta Connection are below current military pilots on ALPA¡¦s list of concerns.
This union's first concern should be bringing pilots together.
Huck, an excellent example of what happens with complete cooperation from the feeder¡¦s MEC is US Air. As you can see, cooperating with the mainline MEC was a disaster. Their fleet replacement aircraft are going to other carriers and those pilots will lose their jobs as the Dash 8's are retired. Literally, ALPA is costing those pilots their careers, it is frightening.
ALPA got it wrong on the small jet issue. First, ALPA's biggest misperception is that small jets cost mainline jobs. A Canadair Regional Jet not any more of a threat to a 737, than a 737 is to a 777. The bigger airplane has twice the capacity, lower seat mile costs, and is used in a different market.
Second, ALPA does not want to acknowledge that Connection is just a smaller unit of capacity no different from any other narrow body domestic flying. We have many more similarities than the "trunk" and "feeder" airlines did. Some RJ's due replace older, less efficient mainline aircraft on routes that would be dropped completely as these airplanes disappear. ALPA's efforts to keep us on separate lists has PROMOTED a disparate cost structure which has aggravated mainline fleet replacement with small jets.
If you look at the growth patterns of airlines, the airlines with tight restrictions on the use of small jets (US Air, United) have done worse than the airlines with looser restrictions, Delta. Another example is Delta¡¦s fleet plan before and after Contract 2000. The airline went from a growth position to a diminishing fleet. We can argue RJDC positions all day, but in the end you have to admit that every economic prediction made by the RJDC leadership has subsequently been verified by Delta and ALPA. Maybe ALPA's economic war on the small jets at Connection is simply wrong.
The RJDC feels that scope (a necessary part of any contract) should not be used as a weapon against ALPA members at the same airline. Onelist is a win / win / win for Delta pilots, Connection pilots and our employer. The Connection MECs do not have the political power within ALPA to make onelist happen, it can only come from the mainline MEC.
Regards,
~~~^~~~ <--- Fins to the Left, if you don't like Buffet you would not understand.
Good post. The conversation between Bob Arnold and Bill Buergey went "what would you think of a flow through" and Bob replied, "we don't think very much of it." Our MEC's were talking and these communications broke down over scope.
A flow through is not the answer. Reference Continental Express and Eagle. A flow through does not address the problem of having six different companies performing Delta domestic narrow body flying. The only solution is one list. However, the power players within the Delta MEC are more concerned about getting jobs for their old squadron buddies than they are fixing the alter ego airline problem. In other words, ALPA members flying Delta passengers at Delta Connection are below current military pilots on ALPA¡¦s list of concerns.
This union's first concern should be bringing pilots together.
Huck, an excellent example of what happens with complete cooperation from the feeder¡¦s MEC is US Air. As you can see, cooperating with the mainline MEC was a disaster. Their fleet replacement aircraft are going to other carriers and those pilots will lose their jobs as the Dash 8's are retired. Literally, ALPA is costing those pilots their careers, it is frightening.
ALPA got it wrong on the small jet issue. First, ALPA's biggest misperception is that small jets cost mainline jobs. A Canadair Regional Jet not any more of a threat to a 737, than a 737 is to a 777. The bigger airplane has twice the capacity, lower seat mile costs, and is used in a different market.
Second, ALPA does not want to acknowledge that Connection is just a smaller unit of capacity no different from any other narrow body domestic flying. We have many more similarities than the "trunk" and "feeder" airlines did. Some RJ's due replace older, less efficient mainline aircraft on routes that would be dropped completely as these airplanes disappear. ALPA's efforts to keep us on separate lists has PROMOTED a disparate cost structure which has aggravated mainline fleet replacement with small jets.
If you look at the growth patterns of airlines, the airlines with tight restrictions on the use of small jets (US Air, United) have done worse than the airlines with looser restrictions, Delta. Another example is Delta¡¦s fleet plan before and after Contract 2000. The airline went from a growth position to a diminishing fleet. We can argue RJDC positions all day, but in the end you have to admit that every economic prediction made by the RJDC leadership has subsequently been verified by Delta and ALPA. Maybe ALPA's economic war on the small jets at Connection is simply wrong.
The RJDC feels that scope (a necessary part of any contract) should not be used as a weapon against ALPA members at the same airline. Onelist is a win / win / win for Delta pilots, Connection pilots and our employer. The Connection MECs do not have the political power within ALPA to make onelist happen, it can only come from the mainline MEC.
Regards,
~~~^~~~ <--- Fins to the Left, if you don't like Buffet you would not understand.
Last edited: