Jack,

No. I am suggesting it might be the least bad option. Larger than 76 would be a "burn the house down" fight. A limited number of more 76 seaters does not rise to this level - provided all other areas of section one are vastly improved.

I am worried about section 1 in total. We all know the threats of RJs. Past mistakes put us where we are today. I would hate to look back in 10 years and realize that we made the same mistakes with codeshares and JV's that we have previously made with RJs.

Lets look ahead and close all the gaping deficiencies of our pathetic section 1. If I were King I would have all Delta passengers be flown by Delta Pilots - all, 100%. But that ain't gonna happen - we have to play the cards we have.

Getting rid of all the 76 seaters while allowing more and more passengers to be flown on Alaska, AF, KLM, and who knows what other contractual sophistry our management can come up with is not a wise move in my mind.

Having DCI fly 76 seaters sucks, I get it, but we (DALPA) already screwed that up . I was furloughed while DCI was hiring like crazy - but it is done, lets try to prevent some future screw-ups. Lets prevent the 2015 DAL new hire from suffering the same fate via JV, codeshare etc. Plugging the scope leak at 76 seats and not addressing the other weaknesses of section 1 would be like plugging a hole in boat by removing a different plug - allowing a different leak. It would do no good.

I am against all outsourcing. You show me how to do it and I will be right there beside you! But lets cover all outsourcing - not just the RJs, which I admit so far have been the most detrimental to our career. The future threats also concern me greatly.



Scoop