Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

In this last decade, the two are one in the same. "Rogue" reps with agendas for higher office actually CAUSED the frightened and disunited pilot groups. In my opinion.

Carl

Originally Posted by tomgoodman

Yikes! Sheep being led by traitors? If it's really that bad, our Profession will expire before the Mayan Calendar does.

Originally Posted by georgetg

It's going on as we speak...

[*]Even the RJ section has ratios of flying set up with RJs required to fly to hubs from outsations and hub-tohub flying by RJs limited to 6%.[*]Now look at the AS section the only limit is 25% of hub-to-hub flying and the 86-seat cap on codeshare. There are no Island-flying protections because the authors didn't picture AS doing ETOPs flying the way the CAL provisions were written.[/LIST]Guess what, we just cancelled HNL flying from a bunch of our hubs with AS picking up he route often a day later...
[LIST][*]Should AS buy HA our current Section 1 would permit AS A330 flying HNL-NRT with the DL code.

If you believe "scope" is an issue that requires nothing more than cursory attention you are seriously kidding yourself and need to take a look around in this industry on a global level...
We are not immune from these challenges, in fact should we succeed with our pay-restoration efforts - and I hope we do - we make the business case that much more compelling for outsourcing DL flying to non-Delta pilots.

If it is indeed such a "non-issue" just add the few words to the DALPA mission statement that direct the MEC to expand and protect the extent of Delta flying performed by Delta pilots.

Cheers
George
[/URL]

Originally Posted by carl spackler

i would absolutely say no. The fact that you would go to this length in order to set up this hypothetical is very telling. You've obviously done so because you are trying to show everyone that we all really agree with you...that further weakening of scope is just a matter of finding the right price. You clearly believe that. I'm very concerned that dalpa agrees with that - but they know they cannot say it.

Carl

Originally Posted by sailingfun

So the company comes to DALPA and says. "We would like to convert 20 of our 70 seaters allowed to 76 seaters. If you agree we have a tentative order for 100 C series jets. The switch from 70 seaters will occur in a 1 for 5 ratio. For each 5 C series jets on the property and flying we get to convert 1 70 seater to a 76 seater. The overall fleet number which is currently at XXX cannot go below the current number plus the C series slots or we lose the extra 76 seaters. If C series jets are removed from the fleet we remove the 76 seats in a inverse proportion. Deliveries of the C series will start in 6 months and we will post a bid next week.
Would you say no???

Originally Posted by contrails

I agree, I'd say no too -- they could just get the C series without all the 70/76 seat wheeling and dealing if the plane is needed that badly.

Just because C series is being added in this hypothetical situation, doesn't negate scope erosion at the other end. Besides, just imagine the parked DC-9s as those C series planes. Then it really doesn't sound like a good deal at all. That's because . . . it's not.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

You are clueless. You have such a blind hatred for senior pilots, you're simply unable to give up the template you've created that we're evil. Senior pilots are the ones that sold scope to line their own pockets. Senior pilots are the ones that by selling scope, made you lose 10 years of longeivity at Delta...even though you hadn't been hired at Delta.



I don't think you're slamming me. You've just been too indoctrinated by the RJ lifers you worked with that senior major pilots are scum. I'm sure many of the senior pilots you fly with tell you that scope is extremely important. But by the time you work it through your mind's template, it comes out as: "I want my pay and I want it now."

You are utterly clueless.

Carl