I don't know, ACL. I don't always agree with Bar on the subject of DCI carriers, but some of his points aren't resolved in this debate, and I guess the bridge agreement is not a rumor:

1) Who exactly is the Airline Pilot Association that is referred to in Section 1(A) of our contract? I always assumed it was the Delta MEC. I think most pilots assume this. Can this association negotiate with Delta without any involvement by the DAL MEC? I think most guys assume it cannot.

2) Is the "meet-and-confer" requirement binding only on the mainline side? If our MEC was not involved, does it not invalidate that requirement? You cannot have it both ways: either we all meet-and-confer, or we do not.

3) (Or) Is this the issue here the relationship between the administration and MEC? Could we have been involved, but only at the administration level?

This may not amount to much, in the end. Maybe this is a matter of TO working something out with LM and E9 that meets the letter of the meet-and-confer requirement. I agree that we can't really force Delta to effect changes in hiring requirements, nor do we want to. I have an opinion about that issue, but I don't think we can effect a change. No, the only real questions relate to who was talking to who, and whether we were properly represented. So far, Bar's questions haven't been clearly answered.

I know that many of the conspiracies on APC have proven to be mere theories, but a group that doesn't ask questions is not going to get answers they like, in the end. If I'm missing something important in your message, please feel free to PM me. For now, I'm just reading through this, to see if we can get a simple (but complete and coherent) answer to Bar's questions.