I think that the gopher hater is part of the fNW "yes voters", who continued to whine, even after they got their way giving all pilots a 40% pay cut in order to save their pensions.
And they are continuing to whine today, by attempting to redirect monies allocated to the most junior fNW pilots 401k's into their own pockets.

This thread is a great resource for all pilots. You just have to read through the gopher haters BS.

I am impressed with the analysis used. You are correct, 30 years left in this industry is quite a long time for these wages and benefits. I agree that the tacit needs to change. It has been stated many times that this MEC is trying the current way to see if it works. When it doesn't I am sure we will try something else.
All of this "fun" makes a person want to look at government jobs. Ya know real estate is still climbing in DC! :eek:

Nah. Give the union time. It's got its own bureaucracy to deal with. But in the end, it does the right thing (most of the time). Looking back on the past three years, and considering the environment, I think the batting average is pretty good. But there's always room for improvement.

chicagotribune.com
Pilots contract threatens Continental-United ventures

By Julie Johnsson, Tribune Reporter

January 29, 2010

A little-known pilot contract provision could scuttle two major international initiatives planned by Continental and United Airlines and their Star Alliance airline partners.

The two U.S. carriers, along with Lufthansa and Air Canada, received antitrust immunity from the U.S. government last year to divvy up revenue and closely coordinate flights across the North Atlantic.

Chicago-based United and Continental are using that partnership as a template for a trans-Pacific venture they are forming with All Nippon Airways to compete with that region's troubled juggernaut, Japan Airlines.

However, Continental's pilots hold an effective veto over the deals as a result of a clause in their contract that bars the Houston-based carrier from entering into a revenue-sharing arrangement with another U.S. carrier.

Deep in contract talks with Continental management, the pilots union is refusing to budge on the "scope" language in their collective bargaining agreement.

The stalemate is holding up the full launch of the Atlantic joint venture and would be a barrier to the Pacific deal, sources said. The Atlantic partnership must be fully operating by December under the terms of the antitrust immunity granted by the U.S. Department of Transportation last summer.

"There are a number of open items related to governance and commercial issues that we are working through on the joint venture, including discussions concerning our pilots' scope clause," said Continental spokeswoman Julie King. "The companies and the DOT recognized that there were a lot of issues to be resolved in setting up a joint venture, and that's why the DOT order gives 18 months for the joint venture to be implemented."

The pilots are aware of the clout that they hold as potential deal-breakers and the importance of the international forays to Continental's management. The nation's fourth-largest carrier defected last year to Star from the SkyTeam alliance and formed a close relationship with United that many analysts think is a precursor to an eventual merger.

"I think they're counting on us," Capt. Jay Pierce, head of the Continental pilots union, told the Tribune. "History would probably tell you that's not a bad gamble for them to take. I will say this: We are well aware of the leverage this gives us."

Continental and its pilots have been in contract talks since July 2007 and, after reaching agreement on nine sections, are starting to tackle "hard economic issues" like pay, Pierce said. Scope issues touch all of the hot buttons: pay, management's rights and job security, he noted.

Since Continental is known for healthy employee relations in an industry rife with acrimony, industry observers predict the carrier will find a middle ground with pilots.

"It needs to get worked out," said aviation consultant Robert Mann. "Like it or not, this is where the industry is going."

Many U.S. pilots find the prospect of large-scale partnerships deeply threatening. They worry that carriers are seeking to outsource the long-range flying jobs that are among the most prestigious and highest paying.

American Airlines' pilots oppose its proposed trans-Atlantic alliance with Oneworld partners British Airways and Iberia. While United and Continental pilots didn't try to block Star's Atlantic venture, they want assurances that pilot jobs won't be a casualty of "metal-neutrality," the practice of giving all participating carriers a cut of revenue on a flight regardless of who flies it.

"We do not want a shell operation," said Capt. Wendy Morse, who heads United's pilots union. "We want metal in the market, United pilots being productive in terms of flying their own airplanes and route structure."

That concept is less threatening to Delta Air Line's pilots, who already participate in a metal-neutral venture in the Atlantic and last fall endorsed their management's bid to form a partnership with JAL that would likely have a similar structure. But the pilots have safeguards against flying cuts. Delta, for example, is required to maintain a minimum number of landing slots at Tokyo's Narita Airport for its own aircraft, according to a Nov. 30 union communique.

Proponents of the new ventures argue that they will create jobs and travel growth as passengers in Tokyo or Brussels find it easier to get to destinations like Costa Rica.

"Joint ventures and alliances make us a stronger airline and partner, and create and protect jobs," said United spokeswoman Jean Medina. She estimated that United's alliance with Lufthansa and other partnerships have created or protected 3,000 jobs that would have otherwise vanished.

But this decade's alliances may prove far different than those forged during the past two decades, when global aviation boomed, warned aviation consultant Hubert Horan, a former airline executive who helped form the original Northwest-KLM alliance in 1992.

"These are taking place in markets that are shrinking, not growing," he said. "There's no discussion of how that pain will be shared."

I think that you feeling is the general feeling for one reason; communication. When that communication is delivered it may make a lot of us feel better, knowing that at least someone is looking in to it.

As a dying CVG ER guy, maybe Ill complicate my life and bid in there ahead of you! I think we figured I'm a bit senior to you as an Aug 88 hire!! Just kiddin, good luck holding it.

Okay, back from vacation, and trying to get caught up on this thread. GMAFB! I didn't even bother reading the last several pages; it was starting to sound like USAviation here!

(1) Delta's way vs. NWA's way. A lot of NWA stuff is better. (FWIW, the Class II nav procedures are WAY better.) The fact that we aren't following more of those procedures isn't due to the merit of the procedure, and isn't a north vs south issue.

We simply need to wait until some 4th floor guy can claim it as his idea-- this takes time; he needs for people to think that his idea was an original one. Honestly, how do you expect those guys to climb the ladder?

(2) Seniority. You guys act like WE decided the list. We didn't. An arbitrator did. The "I would have retired at X% argument is a false one; that's a forward looking statement, and we all know how valid those are.

I, for one, think that Delta/Northwest has a brighter future than either airline had on it's own. This should improve all of our future prospects. The plane you retire off of matters, but what you fly between now and then (and for how much money) matters more.

(3)The JAL deal. Why don't we just wait and see what the deal looks like. If we get the deal, it looks like JAL will be shrinking. That would mean an expansion of flying for us. It sounds like it will involve big international airplanes; also good for us.

We've all been on the losing side of that equation, though, so any glee at the prospect of more flying should consider that our gain is somebody's loss.

(4)DALPA's lack of assertiveness. Many people on the south side are welcoming an injection of the NWALPA way of doing business into our labor relations. Although it seems like the DALPA way has worked well, I often get the uneasy feeling that DALPA could have driven a harder bargain. That's where the north guys can help.

Also, bear in mind that all this sparring is ten fDAL guys vs. ten fNWA guys. There are another 12,000+ guys not getting involved in this food fight.

Great post.

Agreed, it ain't worth the heart burn to get in this fight. It solves NOTHING.

I got here around the Western merger and all I heard was "we did it right at Western, Delta is dumb." I was here during the Pan Am acquisition and all I heard was "we did it right at Pan Am, Delta is dumb." I am here for the Northwest merger and all I hear is "we did it right at Northwest, Delta is dumb."

The common thread is that Delta is still here. How can we always be the surviving carrier if everything we do is dumb? So we may be a bunch of drooling, stupid southerners but we must do something right because we are still here. Someone tried to buy us and get rid of Delta and we sent them packing back to Phoenix. You should have seen Doug Parker testify in the Senate, he already knew he had been beaten, he looked like a whipped puppy.

By the way, I have worked at Delta for 22 years. For 18 years I have made more money than Northwest, 4 years less. DALPA is a bunch of weak, bend over, management wannabes but at least we get paid better.

People hate change. Pilots REALLY hate change. We get it, you have had a lot of changes. Quit whining about it. You think all your procedures are better because you knew about them and were comfortable with them not necessarily because they are better. Everyone knows that flight ops IT is not cutting edge, but I come to work, sign in the computer, print out my rotation and I am on my way. I don't care about it because it doesn't matter at all. Every month I get on the computer and spend about 2 minutes updating my landing currency (if the F/O didn't do it). Big deal. I guess I could cry about it, but it is 2 minutes. Probably less. I spend about 3 minutes a flight messing with ACARS. What am I going to save, another 30 seconds? Really, what is the issue here.

Oh, and you need to get one more shot, for free. If you get yellow fever, you will most likely die painfully. Go get your shot, your family will thank you.

For a group that talks about being battle hardened warriors, it really takes very little for you to start moaning and complaining. SOC was one month ago and you are already crying that all your suggested changes have not been implemented yet. Give me a break.

Continental's scope issue during Section 6 negotiations has the potential to raise the compensation bar significantly for our upcoming negotiations. Hope they hang tough with management--