Originally Posted by
gloopy
Good well they can put as many seats as they want in their E170/175's, in any configuration they desire, when we reduce the max weight allowed to be outsourced to match the 50 seaters. Although the additional restriction on below the deck cargo capability might make things interesting, but that's not our problem.
76 seaters have to go. Period. On DOS. No excuse. If they have to pull seats they have to pull seats. Not our problem, its time to start paying back the scope loan. 70 seaters need to be reduced as fast as agreements expire, which is very manageable. 50 seaters need to be limited at least to their falling numbers while we have the chance.
Lets expand upon this. Do you mean day one? Great idea, but all of them are under contracts that will be upheld in a court of law. These CPA's are binding just like our PWA. I have not run the numbers to date, but last estimate last year put DAL on commitments in the neighborhood of 15 billion dollars within these agreements. If we as a group are ready to strike over getting those back even with those costs, lets do it, but another lets say, secondary position should be this:
Sunset all of those agreements, and do not allow any new ones to be written. The agreements we see today will not be lengthened, and new CPA's in the 76 seat and below seat segment will not be signed. What this allows is this to be a low-no cost item for a jet that will be departing as these agreements expire. It also allows DAL pilots to fly the next generation if they opt to fly it over the current gen. Just for a point of discussion, as FTB posts from the 10-K, the last agreement expires in 2022. After about 2015 or so one of these agreements falls off about every 12 months or so.
[quote]
Rather than acting like 50 seaters are a magically self correcting problem we shouldn't "spend" capital on, I would argue that now is the time to get 50 seat limitations while they are 100% free to get from the company. Or we could wait til there is an RJ-next gen or some nonsense. But in any case the prevailing Opus Dei mentality that we can't get something that is free today because we would have to pay too much for it is pretty sad. "SWA plus" includes scope along with everything else, therefore
any remaining outsourcing in C2012 is an additional premium that we will make management pay for, and that includes 50 seaters. If they still want "unlimited" they will have to pay for "unlimited" planes they want out of as fast as they can be parked. I doubt they will pay us a premium just to preserve theoretical rights to maybe fly something in the future that isn't even on the drawing board yet but hey, that's what negotiations are for.[quote/]
Agreed, and it closes a major loophole that has stagnated this pilot group for over a decade.
C2012 will have unlimited RJ's of any size, and that is fine. We just have to be the ones flying them, on our list, under our contract. Every regional is free to go IndyAir and make it on their own if they want. None are entitled to another airline's flying anymore than we would be entitled to their independent flying. Its not a one way check valve.
I agree with this, and would offer my secondary position as a min, a sunset clause.
Also within Section 1:
ALL JV's and Code shares have to be approved by DALPA/the pilots, and they have a five to 10 year limit, where we revote on its merits. I say this because there are a few agreements like the AF JV that has shown some "unforeseen" results.
It is easy to demand SWA's Section one, but the reality is that they never let the Camel's Nose under the tent. I believe that we can force a sunset without costing a significant amount of bargaining capital at the table. Buying that flying outright day one would cost at a min the outstanding commitments that DAL has on those contracts and lease obligations. It may be doable, but we need to see where the survey results lie in this area.
I can tell you that I will not be voting for something that does not sunset these agreements, and one that does not offer significant protections with JV's and code share. Our WB flying is under attack. Get another JV in the pacific and the one area that we could see organic growth in would greatly cut that growth.
Also, if you want to talk to the FO Rep in SEA about his co-authored articles I am sure that he will be more than willing. I e-mailed him about finding his updates since they were not on the ALPA forum, and he responded quickly.