Originally Posted by dragon

Here you go!

Originally Posted by sailingfun

This whole "The company is offering a huge payraise for 100 seat scope is so stupid you wonder how it gets spread and started. If anyone thought about it even a little bit they would realize the company is not going to offer and never has offered a large raise for 100 seat scope.
If they got a 100 seat relief they gain the difference in revenue from a current 76 seat jet. You have to figure how much the additional profit they might generate on the 24 more seats. I suspect the very best case might be 50 million a year yet we see rumor after rumor that the company is offering us 200 to 600 million a year in pay raises in exchange. You also have to look at the difference in revenue from the company choosing to operate the jet at the mainline. If you follow the convention wisdom of this board the mainline can fly the jet for the same cost as DCI. Why would the company offer 1 penny in that case.
I suspect the company may open for 100 seats in the next contract. It will however be a throw away item. There is no big push and management has no real desire to see that jet at DCI. They also have no real desire for the jet on the mainline. They want a new very efficient 150 seat jet. You will not see a 100 seater at DCI or the mainline.

Originally Posted by satchip

Taking that photo today would get you arrested! Ok, I'll admit it. A shameless quote to show this again...

Originally Posted by Imapilot2

Isn't this about how many DC 9's NWA use to have? How many we got now? 30 something.

We don't need to be Defensive on scope in this next contract. We need to be offensive. The line of scrimmage needs to be us with the ball trying to reduce the number of 76 seaters over time.....instead of being defensive and trying to hold them back from taking more of mainline flying. I know AC is on board with this and others I hope.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

You are dead on with this post.

The part I highlighted is why guys are getting so riled up about TO's first letter. I'm willing to give him some time to see which direction he goes in w/ respect to SCOPE, and the rest of the letter was well done in my opinion. I do think it was a large step up from Moak's lack of communication. I look forward to much more of this.

The problem I have (not necessarily talking about the letter here) is that DALPA as a group cannot seem to make part of our mission statement "All Delta Flying will be done by Delta Pilots" despite numerous resolutions from the LEC's and lots of shrieking by the junior and senior alike (Thanks Carl!)

What is so wrong with us taking a stand on SCOPE like the UCal pilots have? What is wrong with us protecting OUR flying and trying to get back what was OURS? I don't see the political conundrum here why the leadership won't come out and state what we are all thinking - at least not at the DALPA level. I completely get why National has the conflict of interest.

Sailing, Alfa, Slow any thoughts??? To be clear I'm not talking about polling for contract goodies. I'm talking about a defined mission statement or core principle that we declare to the company, Republic, Bombardier, et al that SCOPE will not budge. I realize that to get it back, we are playing the 'What are you willing to give up?' game, but I think most guys just want to hear our leadership say that yes SCOPE is paramount like the UCal guys have.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Well, FWIW, I like most of us have moved backwards... but there is way more potential here than there. I am optimistic.

Originally Posted by NuGuy

Heyas,

RE: The recent lack of scope message.


You will NEVER see a message about scope come out of the MEC Officers. Never.

It's a betting game. "They" risk alienating what is soon to become the majority of ALPA members, versus another group saber rattling about bringing in a new union.

I'm thinking that they're betting right.

Nu

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

I am going to make this really easy for you. Call each of your reps and ask them what they would do if the company came to them with a 30,40,50,60,70,80,% etc pay raise in exchange for scope relief. If they say they are open to it, talk to them, if they tell you, you do not understand, make sure you have pilots in there that do. It cannot get simpler than that. That is part of the election process.

I will also repeat once again, I do not see one rep going for this. If there are a few, it will not be the majority no matter what pay carrot is waved. Maybe the company will try, and maybe the union will have the reps vote it down, but I just do not see this coming to a pilot vote. If by some chance it does, and we vote "yes" for it, we get what is coming to us. At best I see 30% voting for anything that give up scope, and I really do not even see it being that high. The only issue we have is senior pilots can sell our farm because once they retire they have no attachment to it. Other than that, it will hurt way to much to everyone's career.

Originally Posted by tomgoodman

"Throw away" or "trade away" items (sometimes truly absurd ones), are very common in contract opening offers. Each side must demonstrate "good faith bargaining", i.e. movement toward a settlement, so they load their ship with plenty of jettisonable stores. Sometimes they will anonymously float out an idea to see what kind of fire it draws, and if it gets clobbered, deny all knowledge of it.
The real danger is not that pilots will yield to an outrageous demand, but that they will give up something of real value to make it go away.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Then that is at least an honest discussion, and one which I can understand. What I don't buy is that there's no concern, no need to be worried...because our MEC is already all over our scope concerns. Thus far, the facts point to just the opposite.

Carl