Your treatise on "unity" is intriguing. So if ALPA had absolute control over the productive capacity of Delta, how would that "unity" change the current Delta pilot economics, bargaining, and contract environment? Please address in the context of continued downsizing of the RJ fleet and the competitive environment where Delta is making a 6% margin, we don't have a national contract or deregulation induced labor protective provisions. In other words, start from where we really are.

thanks!

What a moron! I guess is this is what we can expect from a politician, though--

Gov. Dayton wants to spur competition in order to drive down ticket prices, and he wants us to increase our presence up there at the same time. I'm guessing he wasn't a business major in college...

The trip I saw was a dhd ATL-MEM, drive to Greenville, then immediately fly to IND for a short overnight and then deadhead back. The dhd and drive were all doing the Super Bowl, don't know why that wasn't picked up on a WS.

Slow,

Your question deserves an objective answer based on economic analysis. ALPA has not done the economic analysis. I'm arguing we should undertake such a study. Your question also has political ramifications. I'll answer that first and get to the economics second.

First, your question is a bit off with regard to downsizing the RJ fleet. The small jet fleet is being renewed with larger, more efficient jets at both the regional and the mainline level. We are fortunate to have some international flying coming on line (for now) and we are fortunate we are performing that flying. ALPA members at Comair are having their careers destroyed while non union carriers are hiring and upgrading to perform "our" (meaning Delta's) work. By Available Seat Mile measures there is scant difference in the available seat miles performed by our regional carriers. As a union, we can't judge our success based purely on external economics which we have no control over. I'm just talking about what we control and that is where my answer will be aimed.

The point of your question is well taken if rephrased, "What would you do with a powerful union?" True, there are limited economic gains we could make without making the Company non competitive if we take an instant snapshot of the current economic environment.

But there are other tangible benefits to ALPA members. For one, guys like ACL are down a decade on where their longevity should be, Both Delta and Northwest pilots were furloughed while their airlines were hiring pilots with very low experience to fill the need to provide outsourced flying. Any time one part of the airline is furloughing pilots, while another division is hiring, that history indicates failure of unity.

ALPA itself suffers from declining relevance. When you and I got our wings, our ALPA membership was also a special right of passage. Contrast that with the reality of today, where ALPA membership mostly means stagnation while those at non ALPA carriers enjoy career growth and security. Most pilots (yes a majority) of those in 121 service have decided against ALPA representation and many are enthusiastic about it since airlines like SkyWest openly tout lack of ALPA representation as a primary factor in their rapid success. Nearly 1,000 percent growth at the expense of ALPA members is nothing to sneeze at.

Your point (if I might be so bold to paraphrase) that a weak union serves it's pilots as well as can be expected in this economy fails to recognize that a union's primary function for it members survival as well as its own is job security. A union should protect us from alter ego replacement. A union's actions should not result in DC9 Captains becoming First Officers and First Officers being unable to upgrade when the Company re-fleets.

ALPA's divide and cross collateralize economic model has a price. That price is seen in:

• Sub standard employment rights compared to other employee groups on the property
• Management's ability to destroy longevity via use of alter ego constructs
• Management's ability to destroy seniority via use of alter ego costructs
• Loss of member's job security
• Members' career stagnation

You and I will have to watch the history of this unfold to know if ALPA has reached a tipping point where pilots decide voting against ALPA representation benefits them. I do not recall a threat to our union as great as the DPA in some time (maybe you can educate me there).

Regardless, the fact exists that a significant number of ALPA members are unhappy with the representation they are receiving from our union. The Chief complaint is a conflict of interest that we, ourselves, created. (this comment is not aimed at you, or anyone in particular) but I find it morally repugnant that we would allow our union to trade one member's job to benefit another member. We should work to right that wrong.

So no, I'm not promising a chicken in every pot in today's economic environment. What I'm stating is that by taking Behnke seriously when he stated "when one pilot has a problem, we all have a problem" we can work to create a career that is more stable, more equitable, more fair, and more financially rewarding.

How many billions has management lost on outsourcing schemes? If we just relieved them of that burden it would be something. To adequately answer your question, I would ask ALPA to start eh following economic analysis:

• Get a copy of all the agreements for outsourced flying
• Learn how much is spent in duplicate administrative and management costs
• Learn where the real efficiencies are
• Figure out where we would need to be on a competing proposal
• Learn where Delta needs to be to want to return to its core business

I don't know what the results would be, I have some pretty decent guesses. I fly airplanes for a living. This analysis IS ALPA's JOB.

Question for you, was the sale of Compass' jobs worth $16 million in credits we never received the benefit from? I know it wasn't your call, but your opinion is at the core of this question, what is unity worth?

Very respectfully,
Bucking Bar

Bar,

Thanks for your detailed reply, but it's my opinion that you're still looking in the rear view mirror. I can also tell where we were, and in a previous post I've pointed out mistakes we've made. Today is February 7, 2011. I can't look backwards and wish those mistakes away. You talk of unity as if it's a panacea. It's my view it is not. Right now economics is playing a huge role. You didn't address how we look forward and the real consequences of the path I believe that you want to go down.

On the economic front, you continue arguing that ALPA should do that which it has already done. ALPA E&FA has a copy of every ASA being done by DCI. As you mention later, CMR is the DCI most under threat. Don't you think that they've done just a little bit of work to find out if they're cost competitive or not? The economic analysis has been done. The answer isn't pretty for your point of view.

As a union we have to judge our success based on the real world in which we live. The economic cycle is vicious to those that don't adapt. You point to CMR. What about those at Pan Am, TWA, Eastern, Braniff?
ALPA members at Comair are having their careers destroyed because of their economics. We can debate the source of their economics as nauseum, but it doesn't matter. Today they cost a lot more than their peers. Because of that they're shrinking.

We operate in the real world, where decisions have consequences. The failures of the past are here and now. It's my view that unity doesn't trump economics in our current environment. Maybe we can shape the environment to change more in our favor...

Oh, you might want to revisit your assertion above regarding ASM's. The decrease is actually quite large on a relative ASM basis, and the block hour reduction for DCI is huge.

Thanks for acknowledging that.

One of the base assumptions that is contained in the statement above is that absent outsourcing the flying would have continued to be done by mainline. I think you're seeing in the reduction of the number of small jets and cities served that point of view isn't correct. I agree that when we look back at what happened we should have done a better job. How about looking forward and telling me how you'd do it between today and 2013-5? How does unity solve the systemwide problem facing the Delta brand?

You state that you're not making that promise, but it still reads to me that you are. Behnke was right, but we were unable to develop a structure that can address it. If we had been able to start this union along the path of the AMA or ABA, where ALPA controlled the supply of pilots, then we might have had a chance. I don't think you'd have like the consequences to your personal career, though.

As I've said before, already done. You won't like the answers.


You'll have to take that question up with the guys that were at the table.

Let me transpose it for you, though. Since Delta management has stated it wants to get out of the regional ownership business, what good would it have done to put Delta seniority numbers with Compass pilots? Remember Delta sold Compass and Mesaba. Mesaba was operating 70-76 seat jets as a wholly owned, but they weren't Delta pilots. Instead, they're now merging into PCL. CPZ went to TSH. From your point of view, those Delta (CPZ) pilots would no longer work for Delta, and they wouldn't have triggered the fragmentation provision of our contract. They didn't merge. What would have happened?

Heyas,

The Spanky and the gang need to pick a new "Daily Clubhouse" soundbite. The "reduction of RJs" as we see small narrowbody jets outsource hundreds of CURRENT mainline jobs is getting kind of hollow.

Nu

Delta needs to play hardball with this guy, here's why. A quick quick check online reveals that MSP is currently serviced by the following major carriers: Delta, AirTran, Southwest, US Airways, United, Continental, American, Sun Country, and Frontier. I'm sure I am over looking some smaller regional companies. By having a hub there, DAL services more cities from MSP that would otherwise never be serviced. In other words, there's more options. One only has to look at Cincinnati as an example of what happens to an airport in the terms of choices once it goes from a hub status for a major carrier down to a regular airport with "competition".

How many carriers could a mayor want? If anything, the mayor should be more worried about LCC consolidation. That will have more of an effect on ticket prices than DAL's hub status.

Additional, it amazes me that these cities want more carriers and destinations yet they don't like being a "hub" for a major carrier. Cincinnati's love affair with DAL is over and they're currently trying to bring in other carriers in the hopes of creating more destinations. They have a "blue ribbon panel" trying to do this as I type. I have to tell you, that isn't going to happen. If anything, any new carrier will fly to the same high volume airports that DAL currently operates mainline out of there. The city in the long term would lose available city pairs.

There is a reason why carriers like Southwest, Sun Country, and Frontier don't bring service to smaller markets. They need the high frequency/volume markets. Anyone wishing to have their airport go down to a non hub status is just crazy. If I were Delta, my option to the mayor would be, "Ok, you can make your city more attractive to us by helping us keeping costs and taxes low, helping us increase markets served out of MSP, thereby helping you increase jobs and bringing more money and options to your city. Or you can make it unattractive for our business and we'll get rid of our hub, therefore losing jobs, losing every international destination except for Cancun, and 95% of your flights will go to ORD, MDW, ATL, BWI, DEN, and DTW to make connections." What is your choice?

Delta's management is also getting out of the widebody, large narrow body, and small jet ownership business as well. What I advocate is a model that has our seniority list pilots performing Delta flying regardless of who owns or operates the jets. Jobs are destroyed by "flavor of the day" outsourcing, whether it be Air France, Alaska, or Republic. I'm sure you agree, at some point we have to figure out, what is Delta's core business? How do we fit? Can a union make sure WE are part of the solution? Here we have a real disconnect. Maybe we should PM the specifics, but I am told (as current as November of 2010) that we've never asked for the Air Service Agreements.

It is on good authority we are told no such evaluation has been performed (at least not here at Delta) since preparations for bankruptcy bargaining. If you are citing a study done for Comair, please clarify and I'll go bark up that tree. However, I kind of doubt, given the conflicting obligations between ASA and Comair that ALPA would get into anything that smacked of rationing that work. Such a study would need to be done at Delta, since this is our Section 1 which we're entering into Section 6 with.

Not to be rude (and with all respect and deference) I believe your reference to a study is misinformation. Even if it were accomplished (which I'm certain it has not) then I'd need to know more to ensure it was objective and not contaminated by politics.You just summed up representational Nihilism. (link worth reading BTW if you look at where ALPA is headed under this philosophy)

It is common sense that a union that represents 100% of labor has greater power than one which represents 53%. Further, it is common sense that to survive a union must protect its' own membership. If you support your union, unity is a moral imperative which does not require economic justification, it is a basic truth.

If it is a question of pure economics and measured by current instant circumstance, we should probably decertify (not that I'm advocating that) and sign on with AOPA's Aeromedical and Legal plans for $99 a year. They've got a better magazine to boot.

Bar ... enjoying the conversation and appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

Slow,

Law of averages says I'd have been OK. Delta hired something like 700 pilots between 2001 and 2007. By my rough estimate that would have been 6,000 if Comair and ASA had gotten their PID request and our union's Constitution has not been amended to allow their exclusion from merger and fragmentation policy. The odds of winning go up if there are more golden tickets.*

Of course, Leo and Fred probably would have bought something that made more sense than CRJ100/200's. We had a bunch of 737's on order you know.

I agree with most of your points on the economics.

I'm looking forward to the pm with the identity of your "good authority.":D

As to the rest, believe what you will. It's clear that nothing short of your actual participation in a study or access to the details of the ASA's will satisfy your curiosity nor change your point of view. With that said, it has been done, both by management and ALPA. You better keep barking.;)