|
|
No AE out... why do they taunt us?
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1473719)
I don't believe that is true. I think Caplinger's hatred for all things ALPA is so deep seeded that he will keep it alive just to continue to poke them in the eye. (Wasn't there original a red line after which, if they didn't have the cards they would go away? Seems that line is about as real as Oboma's) He feels he was betrayed when he got furloughed. He wants revenge. He will miss his target and he is hitting us. I find that offensive. If you buy into his rhetoric, you must believe that negotiating our contract is a very simple thing. If you believe that... truly believe that, then you have a lot to learn about business.
Since you've mentioned offensiveness, you should realize that by your comments above, you're stating your belief that thousands of your fellow pilots have signed DPA cards to avenge harm done to Mr. Caplinger. Carl |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1473731)
A fantastic facet of C2012 is the first measurement period isnt until Jan 2014. So the company can (will, in this case) be out of scope compliance without any repercussions until then. The first additional CRJ-900 just flew to MSP today.
|
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
(Post 1473741)
That's impossible 80! One of the most valuable assets we have within the ALPA fraternity are top notch lawyers who continually shore up lose language. Therefore this must be some kind of misunderstanding??
If this is true then its almost like DALPA is trying to help the DPA. Scoop |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1473730)
As long as they are paying Delta for the ability to keep flying them..... which I would bet they are. You know... liquidated damages. Delta is planning on revenue generation from those airplanes. SWA has to do all the mods. They don't deliver... I am sure they will have to pay up. I'm good with that and I am sure a bunch of guys that will continue to have time off are good with it. :D
Oh wait... Carl |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1473743)
If this is true then its almost like DALPA is trying to help the DPA.
Scoop Then Caplinger opens his mouth and promptly reminds us that he is the best promoter of keeping ALPA on property. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1473731)
A fantastic facet of C2012 is the first measurement period isnt until Jan 2014. So the company can (will, in this case) be out of scope compliance without any repercussions until then. The first additional CRJ-900 just flew to MSP today.
Carl |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1473731)
A fantastic facet of C2012 is the first measurement period isnt until Jan 2014. So the company can (will, in this case) be out of scope compliance without any repercussions until then. The first additional CRJ-900 just flew to MSP today.
|
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1473768)
I believe this is incorrect. The company must take delivery of 1.25 B717s before it can take delivery of 1 76 seater. The measurment period relates to how many 50 seaters must be parked for each additional 76 seater above 153. Not 76 seaters coming before B717s.
That is definitely the way it was advertised, so I hope that is in fact correct. But I wouldn't be too surprised if there was the "Usual Scope loophole" in our contractual wording. Scoop |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1473768)
I believe this is incorrect. The company must take delivery of 1.25 B717s before it can take delivery of 1 76 seater. The measurment period relates to how many 50 seaters must be parked for each additional 76 seater above 153. Not 76 seaters coming before B717s.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:28 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands