The analysis of CY96 is interesting, but it's relevance escapes me. O'Malley is going to be different than Moak, who was different than Malone. Yet Giambusso's legacy still casts a great shadow through our Administration's continuity.*

Our MEC is in a tough situation. Pilot expectations are high and fueled by web board politics which mostly pushes in one direction without a whole lot of logical analysis.

Having already allowed ~ 50% outsourcing, we are fail to perform a monopoly of "Delta" flying. The RLA harshly restricts what we can do with the diminished leverage we actually wield.

People get spitting mad when our MEC Reps talk pragmatic numbers which barely exceed (or match) real inflation. But, unless United, US Air and American bring their contracts up to slightly better than Delta standard we are going to have very little external support for our demands and not much internal leverage either.

Scope recapture can be mostly cost neutral and we should close those loopholes while we can in order to capture the high ground for future battles. Every contract is Gettysburg. Better to strategically position troops in defensible positions than to throw yourself against the enemy based on emotional, tactical, charges in the open.

Moak deserves great credit for leveraging opportunity when available. Instead of frontal attacks he had carefully crafted guerrilla actions which netted the pilots some very tangible benefits.

Moak believed outsourcing was beneficial for Delta pilots and I've not seen any sign the MEC administration has had any change of heart. Unfortunately they ARE divorced from the mainline pilots. In many ways they have to be. We enjoy the luxury of web board battles with no real loss of resources other than our time. Our Reps have to maintain very real relationships in order to accomplish the work they do.

* It is my opinion (and just my opinion) that we need to refresh our Administration. I am surprised this has not already happened. Contract 2000 WAS a high water mark, but it was also enforcement disaster. It was being modified by concession within six months of ratification. It's most important provisions were modified at least 7 times with repeat concessions in scope and compensation. Frankly, these concessions are objective signs of failure.

I for one want a sustainable contract. My ego does not require achievement of "bragging rights." I'm plenty confident the quality of the work Delta pilots do is self evident. I want ALPA to negotiate a contract which encourages Delta to grow organically, securing the jobs and promotional opportunities that will result in greater pay across our seniority list as Captains hold better flying on preferred equipment, First Officers upgrade and new pilots get hired.

What would net you the greatest return? A 25% raise with stagnation (or demotion as we outsource) or a 15% raise with a seat or equipment upgrade and holding a better schedule? (pick your own percentages, that's not the point here ... stagnation and demotion does hurt, as I'm not yet back to second year pay as an involuntary result of both)

The unfortunate truth is the cost of some of our recent gains was paid for through stagnation of the majority of our seniority list. I want the high ground from where we can crush the infidels when they run across the open field of competition.