Originally Posted by
newKnow
alfa,
Like it or not, you, pineapple, and sailing or slow (I can't remember which one) are equated to be the ALPA insiders on APC, so forgive me if I confuse what one of you said earlier with what someone else said.
But, one of you told me that the reason Alaska was allowed to fly to Atlanta and Minneapolis from Seattle is because of scope language that NWA brought to the merger. If this is the case, pre-merger I NEVER remember seeing an Alaska airplane in Minneapolis. On the other hand, I do remember Alaska attempting to fly an NWA route (I can't remember which one), NWA pilots not being happy with it, and NWA responding by putting a daily 747-200 flight from SEA to ANC. Subsequently, Alaska Airlines changed their mind about flying the NWA route. (Maybe someone can refresh my memory on the details again. I'm getting old.)
Back then we flew EVERY flight between MSP and SEA and Alaska management and their pilots didn't have a problem with it. So, I'm not using analogies, I'm comparing the past to the present.
Presently, Alaska Airlines pilots are flying routes that we used to fly exclusively. In the past, they did not. So, presently I don't particularly care who would or should be offended by us doing the same flying out of the same places we used to fly out of now. What I do care about is what appears to be a loss of flying that we are more than capable of performing. If it is a loss of flying, the way I see it, we (DALPA) should be the offended ones. But, for some reason, we are not.
Obviously, something has changed. But, I wonder if it is the language and terms of our scope agreement or if it is the mindset of our DALPA leaders.
I just don't remember our scope agreement changing.
[UPDATE]
I just heard from my Council 1 rep (within 12 hours -pretty good, huh?).
After exchanging a few emails, here's what I take away from it:
* The Alaska flying into our hubs is permitted under our codeshare agreement.
* There is a formula that permits a certain amount of those flights that is connected to an amount of Delta flights.
* Alaska could have done the same flying under the NWA agreement.
* Alaska tried to do that contractually legal flying against NWA, but because NWA wanted to have their cake and eat it to, they retaliated against it, and forced Alaska off the route. (sounds like the NWA I remember
)
* Because Alaska is so vested into code share agreements, no one wants to merge with them. ie, if DAL merged with them, they would lose all of the American traffic Alaska carries and vice versa. (Good news, because I don't want to merge with Alaska.)
The bottom line is Alaska could have flown to MSP before, but NWA made sure they didn't. Delta management's mindset is different than NWA's. What we see now is Delta following the codeshare agreement and a possible return of Alfa and I arguing about the pros and cons of having a mindset of winning at all costs. Boy, that was ugly.
