ummmm what?

 

Oh man, that's a tall order to try and cement almost a year out from openers. Heck I thought nothing before noon on day one and a 16 hour or more long call was a slam dunk with our 117 negotiations, but we ended up with 10 and 13 and then gave back the 13.

And of course, and I hate using this because it seems like a cop out, but it depends on other things in the contract. Scope is, to me, the most important section. Its not just about RJ's of course. While we're almost busy counting our C2015 raises already, I'm way more concerned with the potential lack of compliance at the end of the balancing/cure period (coupled with no intention to ever comply) in the JV Scope. I'm deeply concerned at how the VA inclusion will end up playing out too. Then there's the Pacific, Gol/AeroMexico, etc.

Then there's "RJ's" or "small jet scope", which I also don't like to call it. If I crashed a birthday party at your house with 76 people could I get away with it by saying the vehicle that brought them there was "small"?

Heck, I don't even like the large corporate jet jobs that we gave up after winning a slam dunk grievance. Those were dang good jobs and IMO they belonged to us 100%. Correction…we won that grievance, so it wasn't just my opinion; we owned those jobs. And best case we sold them for a trinket, worst case gave them away to help management save face or whatever. I would have worked with the company to address some unique concerns for those positions, but they needed to be DL pilot jobs. At the very least in the event we furlough. Instead we rolled over and gave those up to non union pilots flying work that was a massively clear contract violation. But no one else seemed to care.

Then there's the AS code share abuse that, while its correcting itself to some degree, is only doing so because of the decisions made by AS management. As far as we know, AS pilots are still the preferred lift providers by DL management. I would like to see that carve out tightened significantly. At the very least, to match what's going on now anyway. Another perfect "buy low" opportunity for us if we're serious about the section in the contract that defines what every other section in the contract applies to.

As to "RJ's", while "it depends" on many factors, I absolutely want to see meaningful reductions in the allowable number of 70 and 90 seat outsourced aircraft. Absolutely not one single aircraft larger than that (be on the lookout for some scam whereby its floated that 9000 seats of DCI on 100 seaters is better than 10000 seats on DCI in 50 or 70 seaters…I really hope we're not stupid enough to fall for that).

The most likely way to achieve the reductions would be to sunset provisions with DCI carriers that are always under staggered contracts anyway. I'd think that for the length of servie for the average contract (3-4 years) 50-100 existing DCI airframes in the large RJ category should be parked one way or another with absolutely nothing additional at DCI to replace them with. That is a minimum for me. And I absolutely expect to be significantly disappointed.

 

Out west. I really do have to walk you to the water...

 

Anybody know anything about a Delta/Atlas Air partnership???

 

Baby steps. Alaska didn't get all that flying overnight, and it won't come back overnight.... to say that nothing is going on is disingenuous though.

 

What if AS cries uncle and comes grovelling to DL for the feed again? The AS code share abuse on the west coast was flagrant and massive. We were told there is no way we can do it, yet we're now doing it, and the big factor seems to be its pretty mission critical.

Its resolving itself, but only because of the decisions made by AS management. They could make different decisions anytime. I'd like our recent progress locked down in Section One and their ability to go back to the way it used to be eliminated and the code share needs to be constrained to where it is today at the absolute highest.

Our scope > AS management's latest round of decision making.

 

Dude. Out with it already.

 

I don't expect an edict from DALPA demanding VA park mass quantites of wide bodies serving existing routes just so we can hire into them. But I do expect to keep what we have and to definately get at least 50% of any additional growth. And added protections to guard against bravo sierra little technicalities like all cargo heavies "not counting" towards ESK's and all that. I also expect rock solid protections from other markets VA may end up doing one day besides just LHR or even the entire UK.

 

OK.. time for my "cop out" question. What are Yu willing to pay for large RJ reduction? Personally I am not willing to pay one red cent for something that is never going to amount to anything anyway... YMMV.

Similar question with the AS carve out. While I think that possible could rekindle, it doesn't appear that it is likely. So caution in this area, tempered with healthy skepticism is warranted. Jury's out on this one for me....

I have already conceded that we aren't really gonna benefit from Virgin Atlantic other than a little domestic feed here and there and that will be pretty invisible to us.... Maybe we can make some gains elsewhere....

 

200ish DC-9-10 sized aircraft are mainline aircraft and should be flown by our pilots. Its our largest fleet type by seat range category. They are absolutely mainline jobs.

What will I give up to get that? I'll take a huge raise instead of a massive raise.

I don't really agree with the premise you're setting though. If everything comes at a price, and its basically a zero sum game, and the deck is stacked against us and all that, then what are we "willing to give up" to get anything?

Getting a raise? What are we willing to give up? More retirement? What are we going to cut to fund it?

If we stay unified we have leverage. Lots of it. We won't get it overnight but we'll never get it if we give up before we start and allow the company to frame the debate as a pie that they determine the size of and we have to fight amongst ourselves for scraps.

Scope at all levels is critical. Section One isn't some boutique clause for triple dipping players. Its the absolute foundation of the entire contract. Everything else is, literally, subordinate to it. I want and expect gains and improvements in every single Section One area.