Originally Posted by
Bucking Bar
In my opinion, it is silly to discriminate among ALPA members because one operates an airplane with more than 76 seats and the other does not, but that's the one member is better than the other member language we've codified.
The Comair pilots should have bought the DC9 fire trainer from their airport and gifted it to their management ... illogical, but that's how divide preferred from non preferred members in our union. Comair's gone and ASA's code has been redistributed and is operated by their competitors. Pinnacle's acquisition came with huge pay cuts and scope which is void if they try to renegotiate their pay. ... quite a different outcome than the result of Delta's acquisitions of NWA, Pan Am, Western, et. al., where acquisition meant better pay, bidding and career opportunities. Sucks not to have a single solitary 77 seat jet on the property. (in ASA's case a 120 seat had just left the property and remained in their contract). Completely different outcomes for ALPA members.
Yet, if Delta furloughs we flow down to these airplanes. So, what then? Would a Delta pilot flying for Compass be left out of a merger? Of course not ... just seems stupid that we discriminate this way.
I’m not sure I ever follow this. I guess you could say an ALPA pilot is just as important as any other ALPA pilot no matter what they fly or where they fly it and that’s fine to say; but it doesn’t make ASA/Comair equal to Delta Air Lines.
I mean is Delta flying 747s because ASA flies CRJ700s or does ASA fly CRJ700s because Delta flies 747s? Or did Delta decide to fly L1011s for ASA 29 years ago or did ASA decide to fly EMB-110s for Delta 29 years ago?
So is it discrimination based on how PWAs are structured or a system based on the fact that Delta Air Lines owned the place and ASA was the hired help for the little stuff?