It had better serve to get us back on top with the next contract. We're playing ball with the merger. How much is the company saving as a result?

Show us the GD money, Dick.

From a labor standpoint looking at pilots alone, it costs more. Looking at it with all labor is costs more. Looking at it as supporting nine airlines management structures, maintenance facilities, dispatch etc, guaranteed margins it costs more to outsource. This is based on our current structure and as we get increases it will increase the divide even farther.
It would probably cost the company more in a dollar sense to have us fly it, but from a customer service/quality standpoint it is awesome PR, and a better product from top to bottom.

I've seen this written so many times, I need someone to explain it. How does ALPA National win? Seems to me if the flying is gonna get done, ALPA National would much prefer a guy to make $150k flying it (and paying 1.95% of THAT), rather than some regional guy making $80k.

It's a LOT more dues dollars to national if every one of these routes/planes are flown at mainline rates by mainline pilots.

What am I missing?

Not to mention the regional unions cost more than the dues they pay....

And what source are you basing that off of?

This is an extremely important point. The typical Harvard MBA bean counter type we have in management these days doesn't understand this because, I guess, they don't teach it anymore in bean counting school.

When you take good care of your employees and spend appropriate amounts of money to insure you have a quality product... it may not make the numbers look best in the short term, but you ultimately come out ahead. It's called management. The synergy (see, I know how to use some of the latest business buzz words too!) that you get from this is an intangible that doesn't show up immediately on the financials... but it does result in a more successful business in the long run. That is one of the biggest problems with this outsourcing. We are running off our best customers and screwing over our best employees.

ALPA..... pretty easy info to find.

Outsourcing creates more high paying positions at national. Pilots that are crapped on by outsourcing/management are more loyal to a union. Also, dividing up the pilot groups into smaller units weakens the individual MEC's and strengthens nationals position.

That is the best one sentence explanation of what DCI does for Delta that I have ever heard.

Finis, sorry to come out half cocked, I apologize for that. I also agree it is a complex issue, but how can you say the scope at AA has not done the bottom 2000 guys any good? If AA had the ability to have 255 70-76 seat RJ's I guarantee you they would have ALOT less MD-80's and more guys furloughed. If your talking about turboprops flying into small towns and 50-seaters flying into small cities within 500 miles, I can almost buy the argument that the feed will create mainline jobs. However, when you have 70-76 seat RJ's flying routes up to 1500 miles, you are not "feeding" mainline, you are "replacing" mainline. Also, do you think CAL would still be flying 737-500's if they could fly 76 seat RJ's? Lots of mainline jobs still at CAL due to their scope not allowing ANY 70-76 seaters. Scope protects jobs for guys at the bottom of the list, there is no way it creates furloughs.

On the argument of facts, nobody but the company and ALPA have the ability to show us those facts. Neither of them are willing to show us the facts, so until we get an MEC that has some balls to get them, we'll just keep on complaining without them. I guess it wouldn't matter anyways because according to the MEC, we aren't smart enough to know what would be best for us even if we did have the facts.