The first ALPA guy I flew with was back in 2008 shortly after I was hired. I don't recall what his job was but I do remember him taking a lot of phone calls for ALPA work between legs. I thought he was a rep, but note sure--I was more concerned about making altitude restrictions that I honestly had little motivation than to think about anything other than what was right in front of me flying wise.

But I do distinctly remember him saying that he believed PS was better for us as pilots than pay rate increases. Now at the time we weren't doing too well in the profit making department and the 5 seconds of thought I gave his comment at 35,000' was not all that positive.

Now I'm not saying this fella represented the general ALPA mindset at the time (maybe others can share what the sense was of ALPA's position on PS was back around '06-'08 ), but did it seem our union wanted to keep PS back then instead of pushing for big rate increases? My captain's argument was that via PS we'd do better in good times and fixed rates would also be less threatened during bad times.

So now we're making good money with PS just like my ALPA-volunteer captain explained. Yet, it appears our union wants to trade it away. OK, I might be convinced--I can be bought. But like I said in my survey (which like a lot of others, appears to have been ignored), do that trade separate from this negotiation.

But to my original point: why trade what I was told was a valuable feature back when it wasn't producing anything for us for something now? Why not just let it produce now that we've seen our investment pay off?

And when the day comes that Delta is not making a profit should I expect them to come to me with the idea of how we can garner a win by taking less in rate increases in exchange for a share of PS? Cuz profits will pay big at some point, right?