Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
03-16-2011, 03:38 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Some less than flattering comments about DL/ASA experiences (from airliners board)
Big Shake Up Coming To ATL DCI OPS (Rumor) — Civil Aviation Forum | Airliners.net
Big Shake Up Coming To ATL DCI OPS (Rumor) — Civil Aviation Forum | Airliners.net
03-16-2011, 03:44 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by sinca3
Dirty,
Buy a ticket from JAN to NRT thru SEA on at Delta.com there's a good chance those legs could be on ASA, AS, SKYW, DAL, or any of our code share or connection carriers....does that mean we are all single carrier?
Buy a ticket from JAN to NRT thru SEA on at Delta.com there's a good chance those legs could be on ASA, AS, SKYW, DAL, or any of our code share or connection carriers....does that mean we are all single carrier?
Do we have a single seniority list?
03-16-2011, 03:46 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
03-16-2011, 03:56 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by scambo1
Do we have a single seniority list?
03-16-2011, 04:12 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
RJET has been operating that way for many years with no issue (grievance filed) from any DAL line pilots. Republic has been operating the E-190 for many moons without a peep. It is in the way the corporation is structured. After all it was structured this way to get around ours, UAUA's and LCC"s scope sections.
ACL;
Thanks for helping to highlight this issue to all of the posters/lurkers. Even though it gets rehashed, it is a super important element of ALPA failure history. Now with that said, the real proof of ALPA is right around the corner with the single carrier issue.
IF ALPA DOES NOTHING, THERE IS NO REASON TO KEEP THEM AROUND.
03-16-2011, 04:32 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by scambo1
ACL;
Thanks for helping to highlight this issue to all of the posters/lurkers. Even though it gets rehashed, it is a super important element of ALPA failure history. Now with that said, the real proof of ALPA is right around the corner with the single carrier issue.
IF ALPA DOES NOTHING, THERE IS NO REASON TO KEEP THEM AROUND.
Thanks for helping to highlight this issue to all of the posters/lurkers. Even though it gets rehashed, it is a super important element of ALPA failure history. Now with that said, the real proof of ALPA is right around the corner with the single carrier issue.
IF ALPA DOES NOTHING, THERE IS NO REASON TO KEEP THEM AROUND.
To further clarify; If nothing structurally changes within RJET, you think that ALPA will win that fight? If you do not think that past practices and contractual interpretations matter, then, are you saying you just want to see ALPA fight for the sake of fighting and spend your money frivolously?
I do not like it either, but as I have said before, best way to deal with this is to spend your money and resources on what is in front of you, not what is behind you. To be clear, I am referring to C2012 and Section One. Fix the clause get a commitment from DAL to not write new ASA, amend, modify or extend existing ones. Do not sell the 100 seat jet. Hold Skyteam to language that will not allow RJET to feed a foreign carrier. (this one is big. What it means is our section one prevails and makes a cabatoage clause for us and defines us as the US domestic carrier and no one else unless agreed to in our PWA, it will be worth its weight in gold going forward)
03-16-2011, 04:32 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: CRJ200 Capt.
Posts: 822
Many of you are now making the same argument that the ASA and CMR MECs made back in 2000. If Frontier, CHQ, Republic, Shuttle, and Lynx are a single air carrier, then weren't ASA, CMR, and Delta a single carrier? Wouldn't that make DAL and CMR a single carrier now?
If DALPA filed a grievance on this issue, and I were management, I would use the DALPA response to the ASA/CMR PID filing as evidence against the grievance....
If DALPA filed a grievance on this issue, and I were management, I would use the DALPA response to the ASA/CMR PID filing as evidence against the grievance....
03-16-2011, 04:34 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant
Many of you are now making the same argument that the ASA and CMR MECs made back in 2000. If Frontier, CHQ, Republic, Shuttle, and Lynx are a single air carrier, then weren't ASA, CMR, and Delta a single carrier? Wouldn't that make DAL and CMR a single carrier now?
If DALPA filed a grievance on this issue, and I were management, I would use the DALPA response to the ASA/CMR PID filing as evidence against the grievance....
If DALPA filed a grievance on this issue, and I were management, I would use the DALPA response to the ASA/CMR PID filing as evidence against the grievance....
03-16-2011, 04:34 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
Scambo, that is a highly emotional statement coming from you. What you are saying is that you want ALPA to spend money just to make its members "feel" good, when past practice will be the precedence going forward?
To further clarify; If nothing structurally changes within RJET, you think that ALPA will win that fight? If you do not think that past practices and contractual interpretations matter, then, are you saying you just want to see ALPA fight for the sake of fighting and spend your money frivolously?
I do not like it either, but as I have said before, best way to deal with this is to spend your money and resources on what is in front of you, not what is behind you. To be clear, I am referring to C2012 and Section One. Fix the clause get a commitment from DAL to not write new ASA, amend, modify or extend existing ones. Do not sell the 100 seat jet. Hold Skyteam to language that will not allow RJET to feed a foreign carrier. (this one is big. What it means is our section one prevails and makes a cabatoage clause for us and defines us as the US domestic carrier and no one else unless agreed to in our PWA, it will be worth its weight in gold going forward)
To further clarify; If nothing structurally changes within RJET, you think that ALPA will win that fight? If you do not think that past practices and contractual interpretations matter, then, are you saying you just want to see ALPA fight for the sake of fighting and spend your money frivolously?
I do not like it either, but as I have said before, best way to deal with this is to spend your money and resources on what is in front of you, not what is behind you. To be clear, I am referring to C2012 and Section One. Fix the clause get a commitment from DAL to not write new ASA, amend, modify or extend existing ones. Do not sell the 100 seat jet. Hold Skyteam to language that will not allow RJET to feed a foreign carrier. (this one is big. What it means is our section one prevails and makes a cabatoage clause for us and defines us as the US domestic carrier and no one else unless agreed to in our PWA, it will be worth its weight in gold going forward)
03-16-2011, 04:41 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by scambo1
Some hills are worth storming. Winners never quit and quitters never win.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
