Originally Posted by
slowplay
Do you think you have enough (wrong) assumptions in there?
Again, UAL is seeking to reclaim scope. Since that portion of their negotiating position is public, it belies your "conflict" theory.
Delta has reclaimed scope in past negotiations. We capped, then took back flying from ASA when they were operating 100 seat jets. There is nothing that prevents us doing the same thing in future negotiations.
So thanks for jumping to (incorrect) conclusions.
When UCAL achieves their mission, then I'll believe ALPA is the impartial referee you think it is. I'm open minded to that, I'd love to see it. It's a great plan B.
But I'll give credit where credit is due Slow!!!
DALPA (assuming you're right and don't have a reason to believe you're not) did get ASA to get rid of those... cough... SIX... cough... Avro's out of here! That's a great start, a decade and a half ago I believe? It's a great trend. At this rate, if you got rid of 6 more 70+ seaters this year we should be rid of them all by... 2611.
Now I may golf clap, but you can chest bump Carl over it:
But all kidding aside, do you realize we want less outsourcing right? We want 70+ seaters here or gone. We just want to confirm that's DALPA's mission - even iif it's a tide that does not life all boats which would be ALPA's mission. Sigh, I guess I just see ALPA as having a mission for increased head count, not a better industry for the pilots who pay the bills.
I mean think of the jobs we could have here? We could have E-Jets and CRJ900s running around on this side of the fence. We could hire so many people! Or park them and start using the 88s more effectively, with point-to-point service.
That's a good thing, I thought, ending outsourcing and bring it in house. So was getting the best contract plus best pay possible.
I just want you to get repaid for all that you gave up slow over the last decade without giving up an inch anywhere, if anything, gaining everywhere.
That's why I support the DPA.