johnso29

But fleet is defined as aircraft in ervice. So a fleet CAN'T be established without said planes in service.

80ktsClamp

That conversation went a long ways with neither party realizing the other party was talking about something different.

johnso29

Sweet. Then you don't believe all reserves will be flying ALV+15 all summer because it hasn't happened.

forgot to bid

I'm not enjoying this game.

forgot to bid

28. “Fleet” means aircraft in service, undergoing maintenance, and operational spares.

I don't find the word "established" in C2012 or PWA2008. But fleet is added to C2012 definitions as it didn't exist before.

MrBojangles

maybe not all, but I sure have-I'm sure the senior dudes have it better

Bucking Bar

Carl,

It took some research.

In 1998 ALPA gutted and bifurcated its Merger and Alter-ego policy.

The policy prior to these changes reflected the lessons of the Texas Air fiasco and formally declared that alter egos in any form to be the greatest threat to ALPA and they were not to be tolerated under any circumstances. At that time the definition of an alter ego was "When management forms or acquires another company for the purpose of operating an airline, it shall be deemed an alter ego..." ALPA's policy sought to prevent the formation of alter egos. If formed or acquired, ALPA's weapon of choice was the forced merger of the seniority lists. Thus the reason why the merger and alter ego policies were one in the same.

In 1998 ALPA bifurcated the Merger and Alter-ego policy and, worse, gutted the key definitions in the merger policy making it totally discretionary. ALPA said the primary motive was the Duke-Spellacy case and they didn't want to get pinned down in court again.

The Delta MEC was the instigator of the change and the timing, just months prior to Delta's purchase of ASA, suggests the Delta MEC had advanced knowledge of management's intentions concerning both ASA and Comair.

In effect, you could say ALPA's 1998 decision sowed the seeds of their own decline and the rise of the start-up rival unions. It wasn't just a bad decision, but it was the product of a horribly flawed strategic analysis where objective facts didn't matter.

As stated earlier, the disunity of the DPA is nothing new. It's genesis was right here, it resonates with the logic of the Delta MEC and Admin 15 years ago.

Bucking Bar

Phantom,

You are correct. President Moak has not been given a completely "free pass." Behind the scenes he has taken a little heat. Most view his actions in balance and aren't going to act on an issue which mostly screws the express pilots.

If we end up with the DPA we have no chance to fix it. By structure and design the DPA does not want to undo the harm of disunity. The DPA represents the old radicals that screwed the thing up to being with.

ALPA has the structure in place that facilitates restoration.

Bucking Bar

DPA supporters ... if you call for a vote, where do you draw the line on the "craft and class" that you intend to represent?
a. Delta seniority list pilots
b. Pilots within the Delta MEC at merger who are active
c. All pilots who perform Delta Company flying

johnso29

Yes. Notice how it says "AND" operational spares? Not "OR" operational spares? Therefore, fleet is not a fleet until all 3 of those things are met.