It's not B.S.

Our salaries are not being reduced to help subsidize Frontier. The rates they pay Shuttle and CHQ would be no higher than they'd pay ASA/Skywest/Compass to do the same flying. It's just we all know where the money ends up.

But we're not paying for it because our pay tables are already set until 2013. Delta is paying. Next year we'll negotiate it all out and by then sure as hell ALPA better have put a stop to subsidizing Frontier and kicked RAH out of DCI.

I hang my head because chances are we won't. Then you have a point, we'll end up paying for it. But Carl and many if not most of us who bother to be here despise the RAH situation and to a greater extent the DCI situation and we're discussing it and have been discussing it for several months now. We're pretty much all in agreement, it's a farce. It's gaming the system. Kick em' out.

Short of that, legally RAH is not in violation of our scope clause right now. There is nothing to grieve until RAH is found to be STS and they haven't been except in a specific representation issue brought by the IBT who knew full well specificity about STS was key to their airlines well being while still achieving their goal.

We all believe RAH is STS. We just have to prove it at the NMB or cause the legal definitions to change so that holdings companies are automatically STS. Plan A imho is change the definition so any and all are automatically removed from DCI, plan B is to pursue STS for RAH and grieve it.

ALPA promised to look at it, waiting for a response. That should've been here by now, hence, the question about what's the latest and greatest about RAH?