Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 715563)

Attend and LEC meeting and ask about the money we set aside for our own budget. It is my impression we have (and are) building a war chest to ensure the strength and stability to pursue our goals, adding to the strength of ALPA's MCF.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 715564)

C2K was really something.

Would our crew augmentation and relief pilot numbers throw that chart off?

Originally Posted by Mesabah (Post 715571)

I'd say untied has a management problem......
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 715557)

ACL,

To the extent that this "world dominance" has contractual ramifications that require our approval, then such "dominance" will be purchased from all parties, whether JAL, or DALPA. Obviously, it's not simply a question of mutual benefit. After all, we are arguing that JAL will reap huge financial rewards in a JV AND we are willing to pay them for it.

You want it, you pay for it.

So I think we agree fully.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 715546)

Go look at the above link. It will make your blood pressure rise.

It is from MIT, FWIW.

Originally Posted by iaflyer (Post 715580)

We need to change the name of the Low Cost Carriers's (LCC) to HCCs if you look just at the chart. The "LCC"s pilot cost are higher than the majors.

I've always believed the major's (DAL, United, American, US Airways) problem is more on the debt side than the labor cost/fuel side.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 715530)

There have been the documents that you state, but my point is, One, I understand that you guys are under NDA's up to your neck and it makes it real hard to have two way communication on issues like this, but you need to realize that your group is demanding that you do so, Two, being coy with information does not lead itself to understanding and education of the issues by the masses, Three, as I stated above the intent of your information is counter acted my larger more visible actions, and Finally, now that we have an issue that is public, seek input, you now have the company publicly putting information out there. It should make sense for them and for you to allow you to create a venue, or medium to seek input on this issue and other ones arising.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 715480)

I agree. Not sure if we would do the same amount of Intra-Asia flying with Haneda and JAL being a lot more convenient.
In the end, were you asked for input?

The way I see it, the strategy of DALPA is to allow the company the ability to create a network with other airlines that parallels no other. The goal at this time will be to not lose any ground, but not ask for much if anything in return. After this network and revenue stream is set, DALPA will then come in with its hands out and rightfully so. (It is the only thing that makes sense to me. The goal is to not hinter this phase with being over demanding and possibly destroying a deal or two) Just my guess.

Originally Posted by iaflyer (Post 715588)

I wanted to give my opinion on this - i'm sure the MEC goes through a number of issues that the pilot group does not know about - however, as a member of the pilot group, there are some issues that I have an opinion about.

I can do two things: (1) read Aviation Week each week as I do, and conjecture on what issues will come before our MEC, determine what my opinion on them are and write a letter to my reps who may/may not respond to my input. However, it is likely that what I think is going to come before the MEC is unlikely to be accurate and probably be way off base.

or I can (2) wait until I get information and the decision that was made from the MEC, after the fact. Write a letter to my reps who most likely will respond with "well, we couldn't tell you because of an NDA, but we made the best decision based on what little information we had from the membership. Previous Wilson polling indicates yada, yada, yada... "

Either way, I think my input to the MEC will be disregarded. I would much prefer the MEC to give the pilot group some information on what is coming before them. I understand NDAs, but I think like ACL65, that Delta is creating NDAs to avoid the issues getting out to the pilot group, and us responding with a big fat "NO". At some point, the MEC needs to say, "whoa - this might be a big issue to our pilot group, we need to tell them something" Then provide the pilots with in basic details like, "We are going to be discussing Joint Ventures with European carriers next week - please give your inputs to your reps".

I do not think that would be revealing much - often I learn as much from the trade press or the WSJ as I do the MEC. I think the pilot group can be give a few basic details without screwing up a deal.