Originally Posted by Jay5150

Eric,

Here's one example:

"would it hurt the delta 88 pilots or nwa 9 pilots more? meaning could delta now replace the 9 easier with this new relaxed scope?

why would the delta pilot group even think about loosening the scope language any more?"

(sorry, I don't know how to quote from another thread.)

But here, you immediately assume that the scope changes have to do with parking -9s and adding RJs and are just aghast that the Delta pilots would even consider this.

Of course, then it was explained to you that this scope relaxation had to to with keeping all of NW big iron flying. Your biggest source of information seems to come from your "new hire buddy", which you take as gospel truth and entirely accurate.

And no, I still don't see how this merger has anything to do with you. As far as precedents being set, I don't see it. Maybe with regards to past arbitration decisions of similar mergers influencing future arbitration decisions. But as far as anything else, no.

AA/TWA had their own set of issues and hurdles and was for them to deal with. The same with USAIR/AWA. DAL/NWA, in my opinion, has it's own hurdles and arguments, but in the end affects only DAL/NWA guys. I don't see CAL and UAL walking into their negotiations saying, "well DAL and NWA did this or that, so that's the way it should be here" NO. CAL has 3-4 year captains. USAIR had what, 1900 guys on furlough when those two merged. TWA, according to many, had one foot in the grave.

All of these situations are unique and have little to no bearing on how things should be done in someone else's merger scenario. They certainly have no bearing on the day to day life of someone who works for neither.