Originally Posted by forgot to bid

alright, does this work?

Alaska just got the TA deal with the pilots. Then Alaska signs deal with Skywest and Skywest in turn announces it will change its MRJ or EMB orders to the larger versions of each AND/OR Alaska signs with Republic and their CSeries order.


Then we announce a merger. Oh and thanks to that merger we will need 6-12 A330s and 2 773s and because of that and only because of that we need to hire.

And so we say...

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

alright, does this work?

Alaska just got the TA deal with the pilots. Then Alaska signs deal with Skywest and Skywest in turn announces it will change its MRJ or EMB orders to the larger versions of each AND/OR Alaska signs with Republic and their CSeries order.


Then we announce a merger. Oh and thanks to that merger we will need 6-12 A330s and 2 773s and because of that and only because of that we need to hire.

And so we say...

Originally Posted by scambo1

So was this our "fleeting opportunity?"

I guess only time will tell.

Or will AK look like the former Kimberly Clark flight department...ALPA cover and all smiles?

Originally Posted by Dorfman

Carl,

I am one of those pilots that filled out a DPA card at the start of the campaign but at this time I not plan to renew. I have numerous concerns with DPA. I will you give you my top 4 and I would like to hear your response. I like the idea of an independent union however DPA and those behind it scare me.

1. TC, through his emails blasts as the DPA founder and his past practices at NWA, does not instill a lot of confidence in me. His email blunders have been discussed in the past and I don't think we need to go into those. As far as my knowledge of his time at NWA, it is limited to his ALPA board postings and his log book write up crusade. He did not come across very well, he seemed to be a bitter disgruntled guy who wanted to poke his finger in the company's chest for any reason.

Originally Posted by Dorfman

2. GM who is now continually posting on the ALPA board also comes across as someone I do not want to hitch my wagon too. His postings as well as a few other supporters on the ALPA board, guys listed as committee members for DPA, shows a lack of professionalism in my opinion. Before you ask I agree certain DALPA guys are just as bad. However if I was trying to unseat the incumbent union I would have discussions with my committee members to insure we provided a unified professional image.

Originally Posted by Dorfman

3. This one I have tried to get answered but I have had no reply to emails I have sent to DPA. So until it answered in a negative I will assume it is fact. I have been told that some of the early supporters and financial contributors were the same former NWA guys who sued over the targeted DC fund.

Originally Posted by Dorfman

4. These first three concerns as well as other observations of DPA supporters makes me believe we are going to go from DALPAs "constructive engagement" to a "my way or the highway" negotiating posture. I agree we need to move away from the current methodology but I think a hard line approach will fail with much worse implications then the current strategy.

Originally Posted by Dorfman

As I said before I am in favor of Delta pilots keeping our money and using it for the betterment of our careers, unfortunately DPA has not convinced me they are the best path forward.

Originally Posted by DeadHead

Sprinkle a little pay raise on top of it all, with a dash of equity, and presto ready to serve.

Don't forget if you send your order back to the kitchen the chef will probably spit in it.

Originally Posted by bigbusdriver

I agree with ALPA on this one and I'd agree with DPA (read anyone) who said this. The first day they used the preliminary data off the box to issue "data" Tweets. Those Tweets made the news because accident investigation speak is boring. Three days of speculation based on partial data that had not been verified and what is probably a full year before the final report comes out.

These pilots have been "tried" in public before their "trial" This is the same NTSB that hung the NWA 188 pilots out to dry. 140 character sound bites do not tell a story and the "news" agencies carrying it aren't interested in the truth either. Heck! I read here that the Rolls Royce engines must have iced up again. I don't like when pilots speculate in public without facts like on this forum that I saw quoted in another blog and I sure as sh18 don't like it when the news drones do it. Many of us on here are no better than the talking heads on this one. Pilots on here were guessing about FLCH and other plausible errors even while the tweets were coming out and the radar plots showing a shallow descent.

I hope none of us has to go through anything like this, but we should all have the right to a clean investigation not tainted by partial data that hasn't been vetted. I'm terrified of the precedent the NTSB is setting for other countries, like the ones that try pilots for murder.

We should be upset that information is coming out in a way that is not complete, not that the factual information gets released, which it will in time and in context with a complete report.

Originally Posted by scambo1

So was this our "fleeting opportunity?"

I guess only time will tell.

Or will AK look like the former Kimberly Clark flight department...ALPA cover and all smiles?

Originally Posted by DeadHead

Sprinkle a little pay raise on top of it all, with a dash of equity, and presto ready to serve.

Don't forget if you send your order back to the kitchen the chef will probably spit in it.