scopeCMRandASA said:
You can be coy if you wish. I'll say it again, people like you are the reason that there is no dialogue between our two groups.
If I thought you were really a "concerned regional pilot" I would not agree with your statement, but I would understand it. I have two problems with you scope, 1) I don't think you are "concerned" about anything other than yourself, and 2) I doubt the truth of your claim to being a "regional pilot."
How about we talk about something relevant. How about the career expectations of a Delta pilot hired in 2001 compared to that of a Comair pilot at 20 years seniority today.
Hands down the expectations of the Delta pilot are better. I hope that satisfies your ego. Consider however that the
key word in all your rhetoric is
expectations. Expectations and reality do not necessarily coincide and are subject to change.
Let us hope that the
expectations of the Delta pilots do not turn out to become the equivalent of the expectations of the USAirways pilots, the United pilots or the pilots of yesterday mentioned by a previous poster, i.e., PanAm, EAL, Braniff, TWA, et. al. Your belief that you will retire with a $160/180K pension or reach the level of a $200-300K salary are nice and I hope that you are correct. However, those are
expectations that it would appear
today, are
unlikely to be realized. By maintaining your attitude, you and your peers are just as likely to have your expectations become those of the former TWA as the dream that you visualize. Beware.
ALPA merger policy does not have anything to do with career expectations. It does, however, say that no pilot will benefit at the expense of another...paraphrased.
That is true. Again you seem to miss (intentionally) the key phrase, i.e.,
at the expense of another. The policy, such as it is, does not prohibit windfalls as long as they are not at the expense of another. It could be said, rather easily, that the Delta/Western merger was a winfall for the WAL pilots, however it did not come at the "expense" of Delta pilots. The integration of some pilots from the failing PanAm was also a windfall for them. Again it did not come at the expense of Delta pilots. The old Delta/C&S merger was a windfall for Delta. Your argument on this issue is somewhat specious. Recommendation __ re-think it.
Not like the argument for straight seniority. Again, the problem is with the senior contingent at Comair and ASA. I have flown with them, and they are neither reasonable or logical.
This is yet another statement full of self-gratifying rhetoric that does little more than demonstrate your own lack of knowledge while casting further doubt on your claim to be a "concerned regional pilot."
First of all there has been no arguement for straight seniority or any other type of seniority integration. All there ever was, was a request for implementation of a union policy. Your alleged straight seniority argument is candidly, BS.
If you had really flown with the senior contingent at Comair, you would know that they are both reasonable and logical. If you have flown with the senior contingent at ASA, then you are not a Comair pilot. If you have flown with the senior contingent at Comair, then you are not an ASA pilot. Why don't you just own up to the fact that you are really a wolf in sheeps clothing, masquerading as something that you are not? Comair pilots don't fly with ASA pilots. ASA pilots don't fly with Comair pilots. Delta pilots don't fly with either ASA or Comair pilots. How is it then that you have flown with the "senior contingent" at both ASA and CMR? Are you sure that you didn't just hear a few rumors and meet one or two people on your jumpseat? Your sham is so transparent that it is actually amusing.
They would push ALPA merger policy all the way to arbitration and put their fate in the hands of an outsider who knows little of the airline business, its union history, or the ins and outs of past mergers.
That statement again reveals that you sir are the one who knows little of ALPA merger policy. While it is indeed possible that a merger might "go to arbitration" your claim that it would go to the "hands of an outsider", etc. is a farse. Don't you know that the
"arbitrators" in an ALPA merger dispute are appointed by the President of ALPA and are current members of the ALPA from other airlines? That it is almost guaranteed that they would all be "major airline" pilots?
That as major airline pilots it is highly improbable that they would make an "award" that might set a precedent and later be implemented at their own carrier, to their own detriment? Are you that naieve?
It seems that it is YOU who knows "little of the airline business, its union history, or the in's and outs of past mergers." You have a good spiel, but you should save it for the unintiated. The inconsistencies in your remarks reveal far more than you think.
--a concerned regional pilot
Sure, and the moon is made of green cheese, and the streets around the DMEC offices are paved in gold, and the President of ALPA is a regional pilots best friend, and ALPA is "here to help" us regional pilots .... if only we would just blindly follow whatever path they think we should, and those of us that don't are obviously fools (from the senior contingent at CMR and ASA), and YOU are our HERO!
If only I could have the honor of meeting you I'm sure you could set me straight and outline the error of my ways. That you are so "concerned" is impressive and kind. Thank you for all the caring, Don Quijote.
