The policy manual did say it was time to hold the election. But, RH and BK, as well as BF are expected candidates IMHO.

The common element amongst these men (correct me if I am wrong) is that they supported the 76 seat scope extension, the 76 seat scope grievance settlement, setting Compass up off the seniority list and then divesting them. With a track record like that, it would have to be said they view scope as a purely economic issue and fail to grasp the importance of unity in our negotiations.

While our Reps are saying the right thing about scope, I fear the work behind the scenes is putting together a package deal which facilitates Delta acquiring mainline jets off balance sheet. The question will be who will fly them? In the past our MEC has worked to keep these TYPES off the property. If they continue along the same lines, they will outsource the TYPE, which has always made the most sense from the industry's perspective. That would cede up to the 120 seat range.

What I've been arguing for is flying these airplanes with Delta pilots, even if the jets are off property. As corporate shell games get ever more complex, we need scope that protects our jobs across certificates and someday across international borders. That is a radical re-think of our Section 1 and like most "radical" ideas probably is not going to happen. My idea of inclusive scope will be called a "B Scale," which it isn't. It would treat all pilots the same and when they could hold the bigger, better paying, equipment they could bid it.

Our operation of small jets does not have to cost the 767 Captains money. In fact, it can help them, if we approach this the right way.

The safety on the RECALL switch has been pulled. If we get a liberal "lets sell our junior pilots" candidate elected, I'm going to flip the switch. The DPA could gain a lot of credibility by using their followers to vote in bloc for conservative candidates.