Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1642513)

I believe that over the 3 year measurement period we are talking a average of 2 to 3 flights per day.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1642450)

First, is this a "misconception" or does it just does not matter? An agreement is an agreement. Would Delta let us slide on recall items if I stated, "yeah, but you added that three years ago...." ?

It is bothersome that three plus years ago dozens of pilots knew that it was unlikely the revisions would be abided. These concerns reached such a level that the architect of the agreement made himself available ( very responsibly and professionally I might add) to answer questions and calm these concerns.

Yes, the agreement was an improvement. Unfortunately, as has been the case with nearly all of our scope; Company noncompliance will be fixed with an insignificant pecuniary solution.

I would like to see some research into the question of whether provisions can be added to scope which, by agreement, permits self help should the Company be found out of compliance. In other contracts noncompliance can result in withdrawal of services. Would an agreement to do so pass NMB muster as a agreed end run around the RLA?

Second, the AF/KLM/AZ agreement has nothing to do with the Virgin agreement. The structures, measures and equities are nothing the same. We only agree that tying them together clouds the water and reduces transparency on a very serious scope violation.

We need to apply for a permit to protest at the next investor day ... want to see the benefit of $2 billion in ill advised stock purchases vanish in an instant for a $40 investment at the local sign company? Who would want to own the stock of an airline with labor problems?

Just because we have the permit, does not mean we have to use it. Giving Mr. Anderson a copy of the permit might just earn our contract a bit more respect than it has been getting lately.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1642513)

I believe that over the 3 year measurement period we are talking a average of 2 to 3 flights per day.

Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1642521)

Ever consider a run for an LEC rep seat?

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1642525)

whose side are you on?
serious question.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1642513)

The question is can that be done within the political constraints at a profit. I think the AF linkup overall produces more pilot jobs at Delta then a go it alone approach. Network is everything these days. Answering questions largely hypothetical gets difficult. Delta is I believe the largest carrier over the Atlantic by a wide margin. Would we have been even larger going it alone? Most of the direct routes we abandoned have stayed abandoned despite the fact they are available for any airline to pick up. A high percentage of AF passengers arriving in the US connect on Delta flights generating additional domestic jobs. Hard to quantify how it works out in the end but I don't know any go it alone success stories. Again I tend to be results oriented. Largest number of flights over the Atlantic by any carrier would seem to be a pretty good result.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1642525)

whose side are you on?
serious question.

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1642098)

Maybe they should try to re-purchase NATCO. Anyone know who bought it? I might have to get some stock in that company. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1642519)

Sir, please look at slide 24 of the International Affairs & Alliances Committee report, Summer 2013.

If we use a 767-400 as the EASK divisor, the result is 7 flights per day from JFK to LHR. If we use an A330, the result is a little more than 5 daily flights from DTW to AMS.

Like you, I believe our partnerships can benefit us. But we have to have a reliable partner for us to enter into these agreements.

Sometimes Delta reminds me of a pigeon. It just does not want to fly unless there is just no other choice. Delta is paying for it's share of these flight operations, just as it does with our DCI outsourcing. The only distinction is that Delta pilots are not employed to do the work.

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1642482)

Norfork? How do ya get THAT?

Oh, and while we are at it, ISO is KINston, not KINGston.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1642519)

Sir, please look at slide 24 of the International Affairs & Alliances Committee report, Summer 2013.

If we use a 767-400 as the EASK divisor, the result is 7 flights per day from JFK to LHR. If we use an A330, the result is a little more than 5 daily flights from DTW to AMS.

Like you, I believe our partnerships can benefit us. But we have to have a reliable partner for us to enter into these agreements.

Sometimes Delta reminds me of a pigeon. It just does not want to fly unless there is just no other choice. Delta is paying for it's share of these flight operations, just as it does with our DCI outsourcing. The only distinction is that Delta pilots are not employed to do the work.