Heyas,

I would point out that if you go inspect hotels, hold PtP meetings, deal with safety issues, or heck, even chase down people who are welching on dues, all on your days off, then you are a volunteer.

If you sit in an office all month long, and collect a full paycheck thanks to full time flight pay loss, then you are no longer a volunteer...representing pilots has become YOUR JOB. Whatever you're doing may be worthy, but don't act like you ain't gettin' paid to do it.

Nu

Perhaps you can actually provide some proof this time since you're always asking for it. How did DALPAs actions cause DCI to shrink and park all those 50s?

Bucking Bar never purported that the 50 seat jet had good economics. Do not mince the need for unity with the economics of a first generation RJ. There is something to be said in protecting ourselves against third generation RJ that DAL wants to buy 600 of!

Heyas,

Odd...you'd think that if the company doesn't want the 50 seaters, and DALPA doesn't want the 50 seaters, then it would be pretty easy to ink a deal restricting their return...

Waiting for the sound of crickets in 3...2....1....


Nu

Thanks for your accurate identification of my intemperance. I have edited my post. I appreciate the comment as well.

My apologies.

Nope! Instead we're gonna freaking do a flow through and have "minimum contracts" for DCI. You don't get the best pilots at mainline through a flow through!

Not to mention that does nothing to regain any flying or grow mainline. It just supports the B (or C) scale....

Nu, remember that we(DALPA) haven't restricted the operation of ANY aircraft at DAL*. We only restrict who sits in the cockpit(and have done a fairly poor job at doing that).

*Except when the 777's were delivered, but that part of the contract was cut during BK.

Nah, instead they come from PCL!:D

He was the MEC chairman prior to being overthrown by the Moak regime. If you are referring to the huge pay cut (which sucked) I believe the Pilots voted and approved it.

I don't understand what you expected him to do about the pension - it was contractual. Was he supposed to tell the Pilots who had a contractual right to take their lump - not to? Besides if those guys did not leave we might still have post 911 furloughees. Maybe not though, I am not sure how many would have hit 60 prior to the rule change.

Look, Moak is not perfect, Malone was not perfect. Malone also presided over contract 2000, which many say opened Pandora's Box in regard to the RJs. Maybe it did, but it was approved by the Pilots - most of whom were too dazzled by the pay rates to notice Scope. In hindsight it was a huge, huge mistake but I will not hold someone accountable in hindsight. This was pre-911 we were hiring like crazy; we had a lot of 737-800s on order and were growing mainline. The future was bright.

I'm sure there are a few Pilots who had the foresight to see what a mistake we made on contract 2000 with Scope - I wish I could say that I was one of them, but I was not. Being a new hire, at what was then a great career, not just a good job, I was walking around with a stupid grin on my face most of the time. This was pre – APC, so Pilots were not as well informed back them. (Shameless APC plug J).

The point is - to learn from your mistakes. I now realize what a disaster Scope has been for our pilot group, and possibly the company bottom line over the last 9 years. What floors me is that DALPA does not seem to care too much about it. I'm sure Lee knows a lot of information that he can not tell us and so I can only hope he will do the right thing for the whole Pilot group when the time comes. But when I hear some of the things he "supposedly" says about Scope I just scratch my head. Something does not add up. So yes all things considered I would rather take my chances with John Malone then Lee Moak.

Scoop

Yep! Our hiring standards need obvious improvement with my dumb@$$ getting hired here, haha.

Can you answer the question? ;)