Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 885450)

The debate would not surround a hard stance on scope. The debate would be around the "cost" of buying the flying back that is dying.

Even 76 seat flying has a limited shelf life. I would love to take a stance of taking the flying back, but we need to realize that we may end up paying a lot of something that will go away within the next ten years either way.

It has nothing to do with "walking on egg shells"

I would love nothing more than to have a simple sentence in our PWA that states "All Delta flying will be performed by Delta pilots." I would also be willing to phase this in over the life of the current contracts, in exchange for us getting the wording without assigning a cost to it.

What a lot of ppl do not want to say DAL88 is that economics are taking care of these jets, all we need to do is weld the manhole cover back on the sewer. No one argues that the outsourcing scheme has gone too far.

FWIW, I totally support Wendy and the UCAL pilots with this. They got it right. They will allow the balance of the current contracts to expire then take a lot of the flying back. It has been what I have proposed for over three years. It means we are not "buying" something back, we are just scoping future flying beyond the ASA's contractual term. I would also want to add a rider in there that states that no new or existing contracts can be extended or amended for number or length.

This means that there should be no cost to the language. We do not want to pay a premium for something that the other side already knows is junk. That is where the debate will come from. No whether it is something we should do or not.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 885454)

You know we do.

New one gets elected next month.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 885458)

Depends on who the reps elect. The names are just starting to come out. I would call your reps and ask them who has announced.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 885472)

I do not think it is that easy. Really. There will multiple rounds of voting. In the end it was down to a pax airline guy and a freight guy that tried to sound like he was an outsider who clearly did not have all of his fact straight (From a pilot from another airline that was in the room)

From my talk with him, it was clear that there was more at stake here than LM and whether or not you liked him or not. It was about making the best choice at the end of the road for the pilots that each rep represented. That is why at the end of the day, LM got 65% of the vote. He was the best choice for the majority of the pilots that had votes.

In the end Lee is a pax airline guy. Whether or not you agree with him he is intimately familiar with all of the issues that are facing us on the National and International playing field. From my other airline bud, this is why he/she voted for him. It was his/her impression that by his/her interaction with all of the candidates Lee was the one person that truly had a grasp of the issues that are coming at us. (His/her words, not mine, so take it FWIW)

With our MC moving to National I suspect that what we have seen out of Prater will NOT be what we see out of LM. It also changes the way the next Master Chairman's election will go. A lot is shifting here, and that can be good. I suggest we all stay informed, talk to our reps, and continue to stay educated on the issues that are coming our way. With this info we can direct our reps.

Originally Posted by hoserpilot (Post 885085)

Carl,

I'm back from my cocktail and the hot tub. Did you get your experience from the military or from the civilian world prior to NWA?

Originally Posted by hoserpilot (Post 885085)

If you want to blame RJ guys what about the guys who got hired before their company got any RJ's? Once their company ordered RJ's should they have quit their jobs even when they didn't have the experience to come to a mainline carrier?

Originally Posted by Roadie85 (Post 885164)

Fault - One night many yrs ago the Capt and I started talking about the B scale. Republic had one and I was on it. Said Capt stated that all us B scalers were SCABS for taking a job under such wages. I agrued that he was at fault for voting it in. I was on probation so he ranted and I listened. Very simular to the RJ issue. Does not matter who is at fault, the time has come for it to go away. UAL/CAL wanting to bring the RJ's in house is a great start.