I can't prove it, but I think it's the most important issue for Delta pilots as well. SWAPA has done a great job. CALALPA and UALALPA have bucked ALPA national on this issue and has made it the top priority as well. I know we will have to fight ALPA national on this. I just wonder whether we line pukes are going to have to fight DALPA as well.

Carl

I don't know who the first group was. You're the one that posted this:

I assume you did research of all the airline mergers from the beginning of aviation. And in your research you found not a single incident of contract improvements made during a merger. I look forward to you posting this research on every merger in aviation history.

Carl

Carl,

Your logic on this is sound.

PG,

I agree with Carl - Why not even a mention of Scope? :confused: As Dr Evil would say "Throw me a fricking bone people - at least acknowledge that Scope issues exist."

Scoop

Uncle,

You have a point - but it only goes so far. For whatever reason, our Chaiman feels compelled to type up bullet lists of concerns. Repeatedly leaving Scope off these lists, just as LM has done for years is a bit troubling.

You mentioned retirement as an example of another important issue that was not mentioned. While it is true that retirement issues were omitted in this specific letter, Scope is almost never mentioned. It is almost as if ALPA National has proscribed all talk of Scope issues.

I would venture that you can find DALPA correspondence on every important issue - hell, they probably even mentioned Scope once or twice in the last decade, but what concerns a lot of people is that the issue seems to be continually downplayed.

About two or three years ago I asked the questioned - "Could Lee Moak be downplaying the Scope issue because he would eventually seek the votes of the RJ crowd?" At the time numerous ALPA defenders responded - "Lee has no plans to run for ALPA National." While that may in fact have been true at the time - he obviously changed his mind.

Maybe having Lee at National will benefit us - I don't know. Overall I thought Lee did a very good job with the glaring exception of DCI related Scope issues. I have no illusions of taking back 50 and even 70 seat flying - but lets hold the line where it is, and look seriously at the 76 seat flying.


Scoop

Any word on the JAN AE?

YEA BABY! Sweet sweet Roses. GO FROGS!

In any relationship/negotiation (yes, even a marriage is an ongoing negotiation) one must put themselves in the shoes of those they are negotiating with. What is the other persons "personal win?" It always comes down to this. DLs Personal win is scope. If left unfettered, it would mean the CSeries would start being outsourced. There is a ton of money (private equity and other) sitting on the sidelines ready to be deployed (ala Virg Am, JBLu, republic, skywest, et al).
As the old adage goes, "Think of your children."

Scoop, Gloopy & Bar,

We probably don't disagree that much on the importance of scope. You all have made good points and with a reasonable tone. This kind of argument with respect for others opinions and not name calling and sarcasm will be what it takes to convince enough Delta pilots that scope is that important to us all.

We need to all be working toward the same goal and arguing our points while respecting others, including our union leadership. The new master chairman has a great deal of work ahead and I will support him until I see definite misdirection. It will take calm, definitive arguments to convince the pilot group and the leadership of any issue's importance if they don't understand how it impacts us.

I don't claim to have the answers but I have seen many years of contracts at DAL. There are always some pilots that are unhappy with the resulting agreement. There are always many pilots that are unhappy with some part of the agreement. We just need an agreement that keeps most of us the happiest and all of us happy enough.

Thanks for your participation and input.

US

I am not sure how I post my research. I do have a 321 page document titled "ALPA Merger Chronology" that goes back to 1932. In that document there is no mention of any group pulling off what we did in this merger. All I know is that our merger was the impetus for a complete rewrite of ALPA Merger Policy that adopted the principles we pioneered. If we didn't pioneer them, then why weren't they in there in the first place? Since you have said that this is quite common, shouldn't you have at least one example? I am sure you will make another deflection shot, but it is what is expected of you.