You wish :) Everything comes to Mecca. There were 3 to 1 A330's to 767's on E Concourse this weekend....but if they do that with the DC9, you'll have to fly with me, because I'd bid it.

If you're looking down here, look up on the North side in East Cobb. Could use a sober lead guitar player.

What confuses me is the blending of flight operations procedures with union matters. I think you would agree that the union has no control over flight operations policies in regards to their integration decisions. Whatever accommodation was made by any pilot group had to do with pilots complying with flight operations policies. The Delta pilots had no control over that process. Everyone recognizes that the north pilots made more changes in this regard. How this should affect union policies is beyond me.

As for the union matters, I think even you acknowledge that the merger was handled quite differently by each side. The Delta MEC avoided the type of divisive rhetoric that usually accompanies mergers and the NWA MEC did not. That is why you have a situation where the fDelta pilots don't have lingering resentments against the fNWA pilots, while the fNWA pilots seem to have a decent amount of resentment. These resentments, along with the upheaval caused by Flight Operations policies, have from time to time been used as a whip to try to affect union matters. To the extent that has occurred, it needs to stop. So to the effect that some feelings are "symptomatic of underlying issues" I think it is important to recognize that some of those underlying issues are the direct result of the actions that the NWA MEC took during the months leading up to the merger. While the NWA MEC officers are gone, many of the same players are in positions of leadership today. My opinion is that those players should work to fix those "underlying issues" to the extent that they caused them in the first place.

As for the fNWA reps getting with the program, my observation is that coming into the merger, the Delta MEC was considered the most effective MEC in ALPA. We came through bankruptcy with a pilot group that was unified and supported the union. The favorable ratings amongst the pilots were as high as they had ever been. We had a record of a series of improvements to our contract that were helping dig out of the bankruptcy funk. We had influence on Capitol Hill to get legislation passed for more favorable tax treatment for bankruptcy returns. We had influence with investors and the Board of Directors enough that we were able to convince them to follow our plan to facilitate the merger. You can look back 5 years or more and you will not find a local council communication that attacks another council or a member of the administration. This is not to say we didn't have internal disagreements, it is just we kept them internal like all effective organizations do.

Certainly there is "home team favoritism" in my view. Like everyone else on this board this is just my view and is equally worthless as the rest of the opinions expressed here. However, I don't think you can look at the former NWA MEC and their performance through the merger and say they had the same unity, performance, or influence that the Delta MEC had. You correctly point out that now that SOC has been achieved, then the best policies from NWA flight operations should be adopted by the combined flight operations. The gauge should be performance and not who initiated the policy.

If you apply the same standard to the MEC structures, you should try to adopt the practices that produced the best performance. In my view, that means that most of the policies and standards of the Delta MEC should be adopted. Again there is home team chauvinism, but in the years leading up to the merger and through the merger, the Delta MEC got the moniker of the "Delta machine." That came from an MEC that acted with unity of purpose and avoided internal attacks to try to gain political power. We did not have political "camps" that tried to put pilots in one group or the other.

So to that extent, I do think the fNWA reps should change more to adapt to a structure that produced better performance. It doesn't mean that everything that came from up north should be discarded, if people can show that their policies have a record of producing superior performance then they should be adopted. How many times have we heard fNWA pilots say, "I have seen both ways, and our way is better." That is how I feel about the two MEC's performance.

The toughest thing for a rep to get his head around is that he doesn't represent the pilots in his base, he doesn't represent the pilots from his old airline, he represents all 12,000 pilots. We don't have a north contract or a south contract or an MSP contract or an ATL contract, we have one contract. Everything the MEC does affects all the pilots. When an MEC member says something about "my guys..." he better be thinking about all 12,000. Right now, I still get the sense that when many north reps say "my guys..." they are talking about 5,000 pilots. In my opinion, that is a hurdle they have to cross soon too.

Alpha, good couple of posts. Excellent points.

Does a Rep represent out of base pilots? I get your point about "our pilot group" but I too assumed that a Rep represented his seat and base. Honest question.

True statement. But, in investing, the degree to which someone is betting on a certain future can vary a lot. Personally, I don't put any stock (pardon the pun) in market timing, stock picking, technical or fundamental analysis, etc. Buy and hold doesn't work either. The method of investing I use is designed to produce a good, consistent yield over a long period of time, regardless of the future direction of the market or any particular stock price. And since I've been using it (5 years now), it has done that very well for me. Anyway, sorry for the brief diversion from the topic at hand.

I don't have an innate distrust for corporate management in general. I grew up in a family business, my degree is in business, and I ran my family's business for several years. If anything, I tend to see things from a management perspective. Unfortunately, what I have seen in the airline industry in general and at Delta in particular is very poor management that lacks ethics and is untrustworthy. What I have witnessed goes against everything I ever learned about business and proper management.

Now, I really liked what Richard Anderson had to say when he first got here. He still comes across as a good guy and says some really good things. I think his basic concept of running an airline is pretty good... with the exception of the infatuation with outsourcing, which I think is ultimately a disaster for the company (in addition to being bad for us). But where I have a problem with Anderson is credibility. He made a big deal when he first got here about how he was "not here to merge". A lot of comments about what a good business plan we had, etc. Then, all of the sudden, we're merging... and he's getting a huge payoff. Now, I understand that circumstances change, but it seems like he would at least want to address the discrepancy between what he said and what actually happened. So far, he appears to me to be just another "revolving door" CEO who is here to get his payout. I hope I'm wrong.

*Well, it worked.;) Actually, I don't hate LM but I think his strategy is wrong for us in the long term. Sure, he got us some short term gains. But at what expense? We have basically communicated to all concerned that restoration is off the table. We have acted as if our current situation is appropriate and acceptable. We have established our current compensation as a new baseline from which we would seek traditional improvements, contingent on the economy and financial performance of our company. I don't think this addresses the necessity of restoring our profession to appropriate levels of compensation. But, then again, that doesn't appear to be LM's goal, which is why I don't like him as MEC Chairman.

So when in the AE gonna be out??? Any moment or later rather than sooner?:confused:

Sober? Where's the fun in that? :D

No. I kind of used to live down there and I don't think I can move back. For 6-8 weeks out of the year I had to avoid the place like it was the plague because of the pollen. Now I've heard it's gotten worse! :eek:

This is all a matter of opinion and I will give you mine. Technically, you can say that a rep only represents the pilots that elect him, i.e. his base. If you want you can even say that the ATL Captain reps only represent the ATL Captains. However, my opinion is that the MEC works best when each rep considers the interests of every pilot in every decision they make.

If we look to Congress, we can see the most hateful practices are those when a representative or senator brings home the bacon to his district or his state. They quit representing the entire country and they think only of the interests of their electing body even if it harms the entire country. We all know the stories and I want to avoid violating the political TOS of this board by getting into specifics, but it is safe to say a pox on both their houses.

When reps start to consider themselves as representing the ATL pilots, or the captains, or the senior pilots, or the narrow body pilots, that is when the MEC breaks down. If you look to the way the Delta MEC handled the distribution of $2 billion in bankruptcy returns, you will see that there wasn't some battle drawn by any demographic group. By looking out for the entire group we avoided the politicization and balkanization of pilots into "factions".

Every vote a rep makes affects the entire 12,000 pilots, therefore they have to consider the effects of their vote on every pilot. We elect reps by base and seat to ensure that a variety of opinions are heard. As I said before, internal conflict enhances the quality of the MEC work as long as the conflict is kept internal. No one wants a bunch of yes men but no one wants to have debate stifled and suppressed by fear of public retribution. The MEC hires people to staff the administration to provide support and recommendations to conduct their business. If those people are cut off at the knees for political expediency, you will find the quality of that advice drop dramatically. Any MEC rep that publicly admonishes a member of the administration is a poor leader in my book. Praise in public, criticize in private.

So my opinion is that regardless of the base or seat you were elected from, every rep needs to consider the interests from number 1 to number 12,000+ in every decision they make. When that breaks down, the MEC breaks down.

The rumor I've heard is May 10th. Take it for what it's worth!:)

Denny

That's the question of the decade - How good is good enough? I would love to get a contract in place, on time, with good improvements (as was said earlier - either the West Coast Offense or singles and doubles analogy) and not swing for the fences).

What is good enough for everyone?

quick question is travelnet down for maintenance? I keep getting a server error