Ask them if they now plan to file a grievance against the Republic codeshare since the govt has apparently made it official that Republic is a single carrier.

Here's a refresher of what's going on here:

The Delta Pilot contract Section 1.D.2.c ("Exception" paragraph) requires Delta to terminate codesharing with any "domestic air carrier" that operates or acquires large aircraft. "other than permitted aircraft types"
Republic acquired aircraft that would violate that section when they purchased Midwest and Frontier.
ALPA has always said that doesn't count. Their reasoning is that Republic Airways Holdings is not an air carrier. It is just a holding company for separate corporations operating under separate FAA certificates. (ie = Frontier, Republic, Chautauqua, Lynx, Shuttle America, etc. are the "air carriers").
DALPA says we don't codeshare with Frontier or Republic and they are the ones operating the Airbuses and E-190s, so its not a violation. Many pilots have said that is clearly wrong. This RAH situation is the EXACT sort of thing that 1D2c was written to prevent. We are subsidizing and bankrolling our competition. If RAH can get around it simply by using FAA certificates then that section of our contract is meaningless. It might as well not even be in there. DALPA has repeatedly declined to file a grievance and find out. They say the ALPA National lawyers have told them they would lose.

The critical question is the definition of a "domestic air carrier".

Our contract Section 1.B.22 uses the definition in federal law.

§ 40102. Definitions

(a) General Definitions.— In this part—

(2) “air carrier” means a citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or indirectly, to provide air transportation.

(15) “citizen of the United States” means—

(C) a corporation or association organized under the laws of the United States or a State

Most thinking people (non ALPA lawyers) would agree that RAH is a corporation and that they are quite obviously undertaking to provide air transportation. The definition says nothing about operating certificates or anything even remotely like it.
ALPA maintains that the various airlines under RAH are separate air carriers even though they are all owned and controlled by the same corporation. Its going to be a lot harder for them to continue saying that with a straight face now that even the govt has said they are a single air carrier.


There's one further complication. Delta used to codeshare with American Eagle. That was never grieved. Does that mean we have forfeited the right to enforce that part of our contract? ??

Then there's the ALPA politics. (there's always ALPA politics).
Lee Moak wanted to be ALPA President when this came up. He needed RJ pilot support. Scope grievances would not be good for his campaign. Then we have the "recovery compact" thing with management. etc. etc. etc.
ALPA National doesn't want scope battles. They want dues.
etc. etc. etc.

sorry about the long post. I'll stop now. </rant>
If you can't tell, I think ALPA has failed on this issue. Scope enforcement is critical. We'll see what they do now that the NMB has ruled.