The 33-2 could do lax-syd, the incr weight is avail

As a senior FO who was hired fairly young, I can assure you there are not a lot of Captains in their late 30's.

Dunno - LAX-SYD is 7,488 miles direct, without routing. Airbus says the max range with pax of a new A330-200 with increased range is 7,200 miles. (and that's the optimistic manufactuer, actual range is probably a bit lower).

Probably any A330s we would buy would replace other long routes like MSP-NRT or DTW-NRT while those 777 would go to others routes.

Alaska's scope is specific to their current 737's, nothing else. They have no right to anything else Alaska Air Group does.

In contrast Delta scope says that Delta pilots do all Delta Company flying, with some exceptions.

Alaska's scope is exclusive. It takes part of the Company's operations and says Alaska pilots must fly their current 737 fleet.

Delta's scope is inclusive. Delta pilots do all Company flying and we permit the Company to some flying without us.

ALPA's attorney is trying to tell our MEC that Delta's permitted flying actually belongs to someone else. Our MEC does not necessarily buy that. Some members are asking for further inquiry, but to the best of my knowledge we have no formal agenda item going forward to dispute the opinion of ALPA's counsel.

In as much as there is already a discrepancy between the Delta PWA and advice coming from ALPA National which could undermine Delta pilots in a merger, I'd dare say that an Alaska merger is a very similar powder keg to what resulted in US Air leaving the union.

I do not know why Lee Moak is playing with this kind of fire. Maybe they (ALPA senior leadership) just has not thought out this redefinition of "Company Flying" out. Most Delta Status Reps know in their gut something is wrong, but they have a hard time really understanding the issue like pilots who have come from a background of being the non preferred members of ALPA. A merger where ALPA walks in and tries to put our contract on the same level of Alaska's would make my point in a very tangible way that perhaps would even turn our own MEC into a group of reborn trade unionists.

There is a distinction which is clearly written into our contract and which is very clearly lacking in the Alaska agreement.

Strategically, our Status Reps should bother to learn and understand what is at play here. Strategically we need to be strengthening the concept of "Company flying" that Delta pilots perform.

As,

Can you post what the hire dates are of the pilots at the top, 25%, 50%, 75%, and bottom of your seniority list? Or, whatever you can come up with, more or less? :)

To correct two points in my post above:
1) The MEC does have a study item related to the above concern
2) The request for this study indicates the MEC as a body is engaged

Reason for correction: my passion for "Delta flying" got the best of me and I mistakenly wrote something that could be a considered a swipe at our Reps. Our Reps are the good guys.

+1 inquiring minds want to know....:confused:

If any ALK pilots are interested anyone hired in 2008 at DAL is at 98% and holding. :rolleyes:


Someone mentioned the bottom 2,000 guys at DAL would be screwed in a merger scenario with ALK. Not really sure what to make of that.
Unless drastic cuts and aircraft reductions would occur post-merger, would the bottom 2,000 dal guys really be screwed? I guess it depends on each pilot's definition of screwed.

no matter how the list is merged, a bunch of AK pilots will end up senior to our bottom 2000. The impact will not be right away, but down the road when DL pilots were expecting to be a 777 captain, there will certainly be a big impact absent a fence. And I don't see there being fences long enough to protect the bottom 2000.

Didn't NWA build a 20 year fence around Republic? Why can't we do the same?

Thats good to hear because Delta does not even have many FO's still in their 30's, let alone Captains. :eek:

Scoop