Originally Posted by BigHitterLlama (Post 2606191)

I don’t know how to phrase this but my intent is not to be pessimistic or throw rocks or anything like that.
I’m still new and I’ve heard a lot of talk from captains that “scope/jv’s/loss of international” is going to be my and my contemporaries problems and if something isn’t done we “won’t have much of a career” or something negative to that effect. I understand that a lot has been lost on the international side up to this point. But when I ask what can be done about it or how this problem gets fixed I get a lot of “that radio call was for us” type responses. I’m all for fixing the problems but being new and clueless it would be nice to hear ideas on how to go about that. Bullets are notoriously difficult to get back in the gun once the trigger is pulled. There also tends to be a fair amount of union impotency comments. Does anybody have a solution? People tend to get disgruntled when dalpa filed a grievance and it’s basically the only dance move I’ve seen so I guess I’m just curious.

Thanks for posting these links and dates NE.

Originally Posted by trustbutverify (Post 2606418)

As you mention, it's extremely hard to undue the international scope damage already done. But the answer to your question is pretty simple. Going forward, we as a pilot group can do a couple of things to at least stop the progressive erosion of Delta international scope:

1. Make it abundantly clear to your DALPA reps at every opportunity that Scope is the #1 issue for coming contracts. Urge them to stand firm on at least 50% as a MINIMUM production balance in any JV (that's 50% in any and all possible metrics that can be applied). We may not be able to immediately undue some of the damage done, but we can at least hold a line on future JVs.

2. Exercise your vote with the proper emphasis on Scope in upcoming contracts. If there's any issue that should be a single issue voting criteria in future contracts, it's Scope. If Scope is not acceptable in the next contract, be ready to vote "NO" and prepare for a long drawn out fight until it is acceptable.

Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley (Post 2606346)

Any fashion experts out there? Ed is a flashy dresser! He's not getting those suits at Men's wearhouse.

Originally Posted by DELTAFO (Post 2606437)

This is why I'm happy our MEC is standing firm on the Aeromexico JV production balance and filing grievances when the company is out of compliance with the PWA.

Originally Posted by notEnuf (Post 2606545)

Since you mentioned AeroMexico...

https://aeromexico.com/cms/sites/def...ll_Version.pdf

Spanish speakers can listen their earnings call.

Originally Posted by RonRicco (Post 2606565)

Standing firm is great, but in the mean time there is no production balance. Nobody expects them to accept the company's position, nor does anyone think that the company would accept our opener, but more importantly, what are we doing to move negotiations along?

So far, all I have heard is that we are using 1E2 as a backstop and that will eventually force their hand. Everyday that goes by, is another opportunity that AM can add a flight. Doing nothing may not be the best strategy..

There are a lot of tools in the tool box that can be used in negotations when one side seems uninterested in moving off a position. Why are we not using them? I am beginning to wonder if some on the MEC do not want to be held accountable. It may be easier (and they have convinced some of the masses) just to keep avoiding a deal and making it sound like the only result would be to accept the company's position. By doing that, they can look like they held firm and also look like they didn't "cave" off of our opener.

Originally Posted by Gooner (Post 2606609)

I am curious as to what some of those tools would be. I want to get behind some action. How can we force the negotiation to move?

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 2606259)

I don’t know how Delta is going to configure the aircraft but Bombardiar lists it as a 108 to 133 seat aircraft. 108 is a two class.