Grumpy old man! :D

I did not know there were pilots that got this too.....

Aren't there North guys on the MEC?

Keene;
Not saying this is fact, but have you ever thought that maybe some of the lack of cooperation is perceived? I know that if I thought that way, my very actions would add fuel to the fire. Then DAL-S guys get very irritated because they see it as the same old antics which make the DAL-N guys irritated that these southies just are not open to another way, which further irks the South guys.
See where this is going? It may just be a cycle that needs to be stopped. Not pointing fingers at either side. I am just pointing out that what many see happening may just be frayed nerves and short tempers after going over the same items over and over again expecting a different result.

Good point Keenster. Can we terminate your pension plan so we're both on the same foundation? Or perhaps lets negotiate in 2012 to resurrect ours, and have Delta write a check for about $3B to start its funding.

We need to all quit looking backwards. We are where we are; the joint contract had things each subgroup could complain about. Time to move forward as ONE group.

Super, don't take this the wrong way. But that new hire gets the DC he gets because he will be hired by Delta. You weren't. You merged into Delta. As a result, the merge equity is very much a part of your transition package.

Not trying to start a N/S fight, but simply explaining the rationale.

BTW, the same rationale applies for those complaining about how longevity is determined (either DOH or after training). Delta used to do it this way, and still has pilots on the list who are being treated identically to the NWA pilots. Their's was never adjusted either, so again, this is consistent treatment.

Those who negotiated the joint agreement made a lot of modifications to benefits, pay, scheduling, etc. but they didn't change anyone's longevity start date.

Yeap, hashing and rehashing this stuff does not really get us anywhere. I'm going back to scope. That affects us all in the same way. We need to get the 100 seat airplane on the ramp. Satchip, I hope to never fly it, but I want it there for the junior guys and the future new hires. Tired of mainline flying going to RJs. Really ticks me off.:D

Here's a question for the scope hawks out there, at what point does our "Bait and switch" RJ maketing campaign become actual Fraud?

My wife has an aunt in Florida, who doesn't fly much, but when she does, she "Only fly's Delta" (because of me, she says...even though I've repeatedly told her the chance she'll be on one of my flights is about zilch).

Anyway, a while back, for the second time, she bought a round trip ticket "On DELTA" only to show up and have it be an RJ!

She is in her late 60's, maybe 70's, anyway, a very nervouse flyer, and told me, "The ONLY reason I paid $1,000 for a round trip ticket (RSW-ATL!) was to be on a big DELTA jet, not some little jet with the kids flying it!" (her words, not mine)

And last year she went to Rome, on a Delta Ticket...but when she got to the gate "Alitalia" is what is said on the side of the plane. She said the service was excellent, but she wanted to be on a Delta plane.

OK, so now our Congress is starting to wake up to the fact that some of the RJ operators are not -as safe- as they should be. And they are finding out the hard way, just because you bought a ticket on a Mainline company, does NOT mean you will be on a Mainline jet.

So, when do we start beating the "Fraud" drum? Why are they calling it Bait and Switch, when Fraud would be more accurate?

And the "Fix" Congress has come up with? More CVR monitoring? Yeah, that'll fix it...

Timbo:

When she purchased those tickets, did the flights say "Operated by so-and-so"? Or was the equipment / carrier changed after the fact?

If it was the latter, I would agree with you. The first though, the devil is in the details.

+1.

It's beyond ridiculous that we're still having these parochial historical discussions.

double post