Originally Posted by Superpilot92 (Post 671395)

**GASP**pppssttt, thats no "Cow", Thats Bevo and he's a LONGHORN ;)

This correction should be taken seriously because a comment like that would likely cause serious injury if ever mentioned while in Austin. :eek:

Originally Posted by Refund (Post 671738)

Just passed thru the pilot lounge in LGA and noticed someone wrote on the board to expect an AE in Jan 2010 and they are adding 900 flights in Oct (I'm guessing to MD88 since the note was at the MAT). Thoughts???

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 671535)

I think the majority of pilots are willing to get it on the ticket by any means necessary. Fact is that those on the list do not want to take concessions in their pay to get it here. What that means that in effect we will have to agree to some sort of "B" scale for these jets. Ugly yes, but it may be necessary to restore this profession.

No B scale necessary - we already have rates for these jets in the PWA, and the bar has ironically been reaised for 2012 by JB. The Feds are looking at new work rules for the commuters which may be a complete game changer for all of us if it effects duty time and rest rules. Too many moving pieces at the moment although I expect it the picture to be much clearer in the next year and by 2012.

I disagree that we somehow have to buy this back at a cost somewhere else - If we are doing well in 2012 which I expect, we have to get past the BK mindset where every gain has to be cost neutral to the Co. If the Co. is doing well the pie has gotten bigger, then negotiate a bigger piece as well.

There are (cringe) synergies in the reduction of now duplicated management, flight operations and other redundant functions. An unknown is what the pass through costs are that show a DCI profit at mainline expense. Each air services agreement details are guarded like Fort Knox but contain the key to what the true cost/benefit is of bringing these acft on-board.

Too bad the current MEC deemed it unnecessary to do an EF&A analysis of the costs, but perhaps now is not the time, and as this evolves, the future economics may make the analysis more favorable. We didn't lose it overnight, not are we going to get it back quickly. This is going to be a long haul.


It is a political hot potato, but the fact is that the majority of the guys that I talk to would be willing to do something to get it done.

Protecting pilot careers should never be a hot potato issue. Outsourcing is not just a junior pilot issue. This may be the first area we can regain lost ground, but there are significant challenges on the top end as well - I expect main deck freight to rebound and DAL will want that revenue and we now longer have our own lift.

Just my thoughts.

Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 671741)

We agree completely on the goal. ;)

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 671743)

I agree that it is not needed, I was just posting what some of the other guys I talk to are talking about.

In effect we have a "B" scale and it is called DCI.

The Hot Potato issue is what people are saying they are willing to do to get these jets back. The use of the term "B" scale is just an ugly term that brings back nightmares for most.

I am sure that somewhere down the road it will be in the company's best interest to in source these jets.

Originally Posted by Refund (Post 671738)

Just passed thru the pilot lounge in LGA and noticed someone wrote on the board to expect an AE in Jan 2010 and they are adding 900 flights in Oct (I'm guessing to MD88 since the note was at the MAT). Thoughts???

Originally Posted by upndsky (Post 671501)

They may be YOUR aircraft, but it's OUR flying. At the end of the day, you're no different that the guy who I pay to take of my lawn. He may come and mow it every two weeks, but it's still MY lawn. When the day comes that I want to mow it myself, then I will and he'll have to find another source of income. And guess what, that day is coming.

It's completely immaterial what happened earlier. Right or wrong, we let the company outsource our flying. Now we want it back and we have every right to do so. If that affects your career, tough. Delta owes you nothing.



This isn't about the pay rates. I don't care if you fly 1 day a month and pocket $300K a year.

The truth is that you have no control over your future. There is no decision that ASA/SkyWest can make that will have an impact on my job, unless we as a pilot group let it. In that case, those injuries are self inflicted and we have nothing but ourselves to blame. However, Delta has much sway over your future, none of which you can control. Just ask the career guys at ACA or Air Wisconsin. They're either out of a job or lost good paying positions (ie. BAE146 in Denver) to commute to a lousy paying job across the country (CRJ200 in PHL or ORF).

You made your choice and I hope it works out for you. But don't come on here and pee and moan about we want OUR flying back.

Originally Posted by Selcall (Post 671749)

Just for clairification. It has to do with certain people on the 4th floor getting called out on the carpet at the JFK meeting last week about the reduction of block hours on the 88 in NYC for Sept.

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 671531)

Can you get someone who witnessed this seminal event to come to the head of the line? Guys like pennenkamp and merchant don't count...they have an agenda!:p

If you listen to crew room rumors....

But you confuse me. If the rumor were true (it's not), then wouldn't it be a step that you've professed to want? Inclusion? Inclusive scope discussions? Rodney King (can't we all just get along?):D

Tell me you're not getting skittish of the results you've bleated about since before you assumed this anonymous pseudonym. Maybe the JSC has been working in the direction you've wanted all along! Or not.



PLEASE....that turnip truck passed a long, long time ago.:rolleyes: