Originally Posted by
sweetholyjesus
You're only making my point here.. Also, I never said anything about your pay going up. Why are you putting words in my mouth? Again... Allowing the company to selectively alter pay rates and pay bonuses means the rest of the group lost an opportunity for their own improvements. That is not how collective bargaining works.
You're right you never said that. What you did do is imply that I was the embodiment of all that's wrong with the industry, and that I only care about me. Quit trying to deflect.
It is possible that further bargaining could've seen improvements to the entire pilot group, but it's also true that our current contractual language as written provides for further improvements as the pilot group gets larger, and everyone's seniority improves.
Umm, when did I say anything about PSA? While we're on the subject, do you think PSA undercutting another ALPA carrier is a good thing? But sure, they "positioned themselves for leverage" by voting in concessions to take jets from another ALPA carrier, forcing the others to take concessions as well. What a great move for pilots everywhere...
Please tell me how many regional pilot groups have taken pay cuts since December of 2013. I'll wait.
Scope has been sold because mainline pilots (ALPA) wanted it that way.
Once again you can't answer my question. If the evil, diabolical ALPA National and all their overpaid minions in Herndon could make more money with more Mainline pilots, then why ever sell off scope?
"Holding the line" on scope that's already been sold off does nothing to change the current state of affairs. How much has ALPA national done to retake scope? Zero. Why? Because the loss of subsidizing from low regional wages would hurt mainline pilots' wallets.
I suggest you digest the information presented
here, here, and on
page 12 of this document, and get back to me.
Additionally,
manufacturers and other analysts (i.e. people with a lot more information than you) think that continued scope relief is unlikely.
Under one combined union, management wouldn't be allowed to offer something to one group without offering it to the other. It's called collective bargaining for a reason. I guess that's a concept you don't fully understand since you support targeted signing bonuses and uneven pay raises.
It's called collective bargaining because it's one representative (a union) bargaining on behalf of an entire pilot group (singular). What you're describing doesn't actually exist, and will likely never exist for reasons I've already laid out. So why waste brain cells getting mad about something that won't ever happen?
Being afraid of change is no reason to stay under ALPA's boot. The Association limits the regionals from negotiating collectively. I think it's peculiarly ironic that all 3 AA WO carriers are ALPA. All are owned by and flying for the same carrier, and all have been repeatedly whipsawed against each other to reduce wages. AA's intent is so obvious, and ALPA couldn't care less. Why would you support that kind of representation?
I've already pointed out why your proposed solution is impractical.
Also, please tell me, since you're SO incensed at how much the low wages of regionals subsidize the wages of mainline, and that ALPA is happy to subsidize the representation of regional pilots to keep that going, just how much dues revenue does ALPA receive from AA pilots to subsidize the representation costs at the three wholly owned regionals?
Because I have no idea what you're getting at. Again, why don't you try making your own argument?
It's really simple. Three questions:
1. Who owns the flying of a given company?
2. How many customers does a mainline carrier have?
3. How many customers does a regional carrier have?
Your quarrel is more with the reality embodied in the above three questions than with ALPA.
Soooo once again, you only prove my point. I really don't understand why you're arguing with me on this. You said earlier that Endeavor CRJ pay isn't less than Delta CRJ pay because Delta doesn't actually fly CRJs. Now you've done a 180, and you're telling me "Oh it's not the pay rates that make Endeavor cheaper it's the benefits, that's why Delta isn't flying them". So basically, Endeavor is cheaper, just like I said. Splitting hairs after the fact doesn't make you any less wrong...
Actually if you go back and read what I wrote, I said no such thing. I said the rates "were only a small part of the present and future costs of operating those aircraft." See my next answer.
So, you're telling me Delta is contracting out their RJs because they wouldn't be able to hire enough people?? Bwhahahaha!
Again, I said no such thing. What I did say is that if the airlines get legislative relief on the ATP rule (meaning sub 1,000 hour FOs at regionals again) or get Age 67 passed (another two years of fewer retirements) then the pilot supply issue will not be as bad as it currently is, therefore those bonuses and pay rates will come back down. There's a reason they're only temporary.
----
Look, ultimately we both want the same thing: Current "regional" aircraft flown on mainline certificates at mainline rates. My own feeling is that we'll get there, absent legislative relief that the airlines would like to see, and that ALPA is fighting.
The difference between you and I is that I'm actually going to take the time to see things how they are, and not try and imagine some fantasy that will never exist while being driven by my hatred for things I don't fully understand.
If you'd like to continue this conversation, answer my three questions above and get back to me.