Originally Posted by johnso29

Well there's no concern then.

Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom

Question for the moderator(s):

Some time ago (a year?) it was decided to start a DALPA vs DPA thread and posts on that subject were encouraged to be posted there. Any which showed up on the "Latest & Greatest" thread were manually moved there by the moderators.

So why are you now tolerating the DALPA vs DPA debate on the "Latest & Greatest" thread ad nauseum?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Indeed. There's no concern at all for the TWA pilots. A jury saw to that.

Carl

Originally Posted by Bob Wiley

I agree! Who cares if they have over 5000 cards supposedly received from Delta pilots. We know lots of those cards were just people looking but not really interested. Our current representation has everything we need. It is proven that pilots cannot always do what is in their best interest.

Originally Posted by Bob Wiley

We need people at the top, with the information, who can make the best decisions for our future. I trust my union and those I have elected to represent me.

Originally Posted by SawF16

Good discussion. First though, I'm not advocating LGB, I see it as some pros/some cons personally. The essence of what Johnso brought up is "will Delta pilots be harmed during a potential merger if 737-9 and A321s pay the same as the 75/76." I also have a big response to your above regarding who on our list benefits and who REALLY loses if we have a merger with Alaska and ONLY merge them into the 737 fleet IAW the type of integration I think you are referencing in lieu of a ratio, but it may be too long.

Instead, I'll play devil's advocate and assume yes, it is harmful to our pilot group to have the 737-9 and A321 pay the same as a 75/76 in the event of a merger with Alaska (or Jetblue/Spirit etc if you prefer). In that case, since we are just about the only carrier out there with MD-88s and one of the few with 717s, shouldn't we immediately begin petitioning the company to make any potential common types in a merger, such as the 73 and the 320 placed at the absolute bottom of our pay scale? If we as a union/company put pay rates on the M88 and 717 $20 per hour above any other narrowbody, wont we be able to prove financial damage IAW your logic above? That way we get to ratio anyone we would even theoretically merge with (except HAL with their 717s) way down at the bottom portions of our stovepiped list vs the upper portions of our stovepiped narrowbody list.

For that matter, shouldn't we also start demanding that the M-88 and 717 pay MORE than the 777/747 so that even if we have another merger with a widebody carrier they won't have access to the top regions of our seniority list?

Also went a bit long, thanks for the discussion!

Originally Posted by n9810f

You know we put winglets on about a dozen of the 757's from around 638 up through many of the 660 series ships.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

A very good thing to be properly funded for these eventualities.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Too much ALPA flight pay loss is funded by Delta management. That's a bad thing when these ALPA folks are supposed to be working for us.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

You mean the USAPA that is continually described by you and the other "ALPA at all costs" folks as being a failed and morally bankrupt organization? Isn't being fired from a morally bankrupt and failed organization a good thing?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Besieds, you and ALPA just hate the guys because his firm has so often successfully decertified ALPA from airline property. I understand your angst about his firm.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Having adequate access to capital is a good thing and proof of a good plan. If they didn't get a line of credit, you'd be slamming them for not being able to get credit.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

11,000 Delta pilots is a very formidable lobbying force. CAPA will be dying for us to join, not the other way around. The lobbying might be different this time though. We won't be against age 60 before we cave in on it. We won't be for the 1,500 hour rule before we cave in on it. We won't back management on Flight Time/Duty Time regs.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

It's actually a great start. Very exciting possibilities ahead with being free from ALPA.

Originally Posted by slowplay

Regarding DPA discussions one of the moderators said "man up." btw, he was a dpa card signer and now a face palmer..

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

Wasn't there a DPA thread that was kept in the Majors section so that talk could focus there? We've got aircraft orders, newhire classes starting soon, seemingly compounding 717 issues, an AE is coming out tomorrow, and I get in from flying and it's all DPA/DALPA.

Sheesh.