I think for Delta, pilots flying the 76 seater routes with mainline 717s has finally become economical and will continue to be so for the near future. The real reason is the anticipated turnover. As we start retiring 400-800 pilots a year, the turnover on the smaller fleet will be tremendous. And thereby allowing the cost of operating the 717 to be low. Of course that is assuming people will progress off the 717 to larger airframes.

AA got pay bumps in their concessionary contract that jump on up closer to ours (and eventually pass us), so the laggard will still be US. You can bet your paycheck they sure won't be raising the bar by themselves by then...and probably will be working under the same payrates as they have for the last 9 or whatever it is years. USAPA: the ostrich with its head in the sand of pilot unions.

Fair enough. I know we won't agree, but I appreciate the good exchange.

I openly support ALPA and encourage getting involved when I'm out on the line, but one reality you're going to have to deal with in your second part is that right at half the pilot group (above half of active pilots) has put in a DPA card. Apparently most of those things have been renewed.

This is in no small part to the many missteps that have been made, particularly with the C2012 effort. That alone was worth about 800 cards immediately afterward. ALPA, should they want to remain our bargaining agent, is going to have to seriously look at the way they do things, how they take line pilot input, and how they take ALPA national lawyer input if they want to stop that train coming down the tracks.

The blood is on many of your alpa predecesors' hands, but its up to the current regime to fix. Get on it!

I have no idea. I wasn't there when it happened. I hope it was a number that made the company side gulp and take a real deep breath, but not one that made them laugh out loud.

I don't care what the opening integer is. I evaluate as purely as I can(we all have inherent bias) based on the calculated economic/goodwill leverage the union has in a given situation. The Company was in an "ok" situation a year ago and I think our peers had done little to nothing to raise the bar around us, everyone(sans SWA) was lagging our deal by a good bit.... Thus we got an "ok" contract.

Come 2015 openers we will expect to have a company going "great", and our peers will have finally bolstered the comparative levels of compensation by large strides...That bodes well for a "great" contract.

Let's hope the LCC/AMR goes through, having top scale A320A's making the same as a DAL 7ERB on 4th year pay, and top scale E190A's making the same as a DAL 4th year M88B makes it hard to pattern up.

That's good to hear. I was under the impression their pay bumps were based on exiting BK and the merger. Are you saying they are definitely getting pay that eventually passes us even if they are still in BK?

You're thinking of the LOA with US. There was a concessionary agreement reached late last year/early this year that locked in similar payrates to the US LOA.

Thanks, we need many more pilots like you out there advocating involvement. We don't always see eye-to-eye but I appreciate how you keep it above board and mostly minimize the drama.

The blood is on the hands of the members (of which we both are and have responsibility to each other)! They vote for the reps and the agreements.... If pilots do not take the time to make sure they have elected quality people to represent them(and recall them if they don't), and then don't take the time to evaluate and vote accordingly then it isn't the acronym's fault!

There are too many pilots who say one thing and expect something different in reality. It's not practical or reasonable to say "you better hit my lofty expectations" while openly doing things that submarine the efforts to meet those expectations and later complaining that your expectations weren't met.

Having lots of pilots around with stickers and bag tags that basically say "MY NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME" hurts our leverage and reduces the amount of gains the NC is able to secure for the pilot group. It hurts us collectively and potentially takes money out of OUR pocket. I'm just sick and tired of the DPA's divisive actions, deceit, and outright lies.

In 1990 though, what kind of 70 seaters were out there? The BAE146 for sure, with it's 4 APUs, but it'd been competing with 61 732s and 36 DC93s. Was there anything like the CRJ700/900 or E170/175?

I'm game and I'll pay $100 to the Delta Pilot Charitable Fund IF any PWA or JPWA put up for member ratification by DALPA does not include any one of the following:

• An increase of DCI/outsourced seating beyond 76 seats per jet, or
• An increase in the size of the 71+ seat fleet to 226 or more jets,
• An increase in the size of the 51-70 seat fleet to 103 or more jets, or
• An increase in the total 51+ seat fleet to 326 or more jets.

And no, an exchange of any of the current PWA limits for fewer 50 seaters is not a win. We now know from the earnings calls how much of a financial and customer service albatross those things are now so imho they can just fade without a swap. A swap is not a win.

So to recap, I'll HAPPILY pay $100 if not any one of those four points is put up for memrat. And if any one of those happens to be in there- I'll pay anyways since it's a good charity. But you have to give to the DPCF and admit why.

As far as I know (and I've been wrong before:eek:)...

the AA rates will be roughly 12-15% below DAL DEC2012 at signing, and then they will increase 2%/yr until year 5 when they will be averaged against the other large passenger carriers, and then 2% for years 6 and 7.

I'm racking my brain on this one, but I do remember that it was a 6 year agreement and it did eventually pass our 2015 rates if we don't pattern up by then. Not bad for a bankruptcy deal...