Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?


Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Old 03-16-2011 | 05:32 AM
  #61681  
forgot to bid's Avatar
veut gagner à la loterie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Default

“Control” for the purposes of Section 1, will exist by entity A over entity B, only if A,
whether directly or indirectly through the control of other entities:
a. owns securities that constitute and/or are exchangeable into, exercisable for or
convertible into more than:
1) 30 percent (49 percent with respect to the Company’s interest in a foreign air
carrier) of B’s outstanding common stock, or if stock in addition to common stock
has voting power, then
2) 30 percent (49 percent with respect to the Company’s interest in a foreign air
carrier) of the voting power of all outstanding securities of B entitled to vote
generally for the election of members of B’s Board of Directors or similar
governing body, or
b. has the power or right to manage or direct the management of all or substantially all
of B’s air carrier operations, or

c. has the power or right to designate or provide all or substantially all of B’s officers, or
d. has the power or right to provide a majority of the following management services for capacity planning, financial planning, strategic planning, market planning,
marketing and sales, technical operations, flight operations, and human resources
activities, or

e. has the power or right to appoint or elect or prevent the appointment or election of a
majority of B’s Board of Directors, or other governing body having substantially the
powers and duties of a Board of Directors, or
f. has the power or right to appoint or elect or to prevent the appointment or election of
a minority of B’s Board of Directors or similar governing body, but only if such
minority has the power or right to appoint or remove B’s Chief Executive Officer, or
President, or Chief Operating Officer, or the majority membership of the Executive
Committee or similar committee on B’s Board of Directors, or the majority
membership of at least one-half of B’s Board committees.
What if Skywest bought Allegiant or started an E190/A320 operation out west. Still not a violation?
Old 03-16-2011 | 05:35 AM
  #61682  
acl65pilot's Avatar
Happy to be here
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
first, like dirty said, we don't have an SLI with comair, asa, skywest, chq, etc.

second, sure when you buy a ticket on delta to nrt you may at some point fly on a dci carrier or the oversized dci carrier known as alaska, but that's all a part of the scope arrangement.

i don't see how this passes the test. The PWA defines an air carrier as: a citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or indirectly, to provide air transportation.

I see both the Midwest flying on the E190s and the Frontier flying on E190s and A319s is in violation of 1.D.2.

RAH has has the power or right to manage or direct the management of all or substantially all of the other carriers operations, that's control according to section 1. Their pilots are all on 1 list, how that's not operating in essence as a single carrier is beyond me.

All of this started when CHQ got caught by APA back in 03 or 04. APA needs to step back in and do something about it, for the sake of Delta pilots.
That all sounds compelling, but the reality remains that even with F9 and MEH on the their list, nothing structurally has changed in how RJET is structured. It was accepted as in compliance under the old joint list, and an arbitrator or judge will see it as the same unless they structurally change the way they are operating the holding company. Ugly, yep, but the reality still remains.

As I have said, the old language would have taken care of it, but this language talks about operators (certificates) and not holding companies. Legalese if you will, but very important.

Like I said, file a personal or group grievance and see if your proof can change the current practice. Many of us looked long and hard at this, and wanted what you all want. Willing something to happen does not do much in the legal world.
Old 03-16-2011 | 05:44 AM
  #61683  
acl65pilot's Avatar
Happy to be here
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
What if Skywest bought Allegiant or started an E190/A320 operation out west. Still not a violation?
If under the SKW certificate, but on a separate certificate and operation, no.
Old 03-16-2011 | 06:28 AM
  #61684  
forgot to bid's Avatar
veut gagner à la loterie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Default

So I guess there are two takeaways from this RAH situation:

1) Delta is funding it's competition and growth thereof and is not going to do anything about it which is not only questionable, but scary, and more importantly,

2) ALPA let the language out of the contract that would've held, without a doubt, RAH in contempt of our Section 1.

Thus, for all of the money we pay to the wizards of smart at DALPA and Herndon they couldn't see this coming and they're not going to do anything about it now. Shame.

Heck of a blueprint for every regional airline that knows fee for departure is ending.

Is this not being litigated because ALPA wants RAH? I wouldn't blame them, in time, could be a lot of money.
Old 03-16-2011 | 06:31 AM
  #61685  
tsquare's Avatar
No longer cares
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Default

Originally Posted by acl65pilot
You never know with the DOJ, but having someone go after your feed is a good reason to approve something. If they opt not to, it is a great reason for a good fight.
I don't get your logic here. So what if someone goes after our feed? If our purchasing that entity would then result in a monopoly, the DOJ would be remiss if they then approved that. And then you go on to say that it would be a good reason to fight, yet in this very same post you castigate guys that wanted to fight the scope issue because we had zero chance of winning. What is ACL's definition of time to fight?
Old 03-16-2011 | 06:43 AM
  #61686  
DAL 88 Driver's Avatar
At home on the maddog!
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,874
Likes: 0
From: Retired (mandatory age 65)
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare
What is ACL's definition of time to fight?
When the ALPA lawyers say it's okay?
Old 03-16-2011 | 06:44 AM
  #61687  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 326
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
So I guess there are two takeaways from this RAH situation:

1) Delta is funding it's competition and growth thereof and is not going to do anything about it which is not only questionable, but scary, and more importantly,

2) ALPA let the language out of the contract that would've held, without a doubt, RAH in contempt of our Section 1.

Thus, for all of the money we pay to the wizards of smart at DALPA and Herndon they couldn't see this coming and they're not going to do anything about it now. Shame.

Heck of a blueprint for every regional airline that knows fee for departure is ending.

Is this not being litigated because ALPA wants RAH? I wouldn't blame them, in time, could be a lot of money.
Delta just awarded Shuttle America more flying in the last month. Don't kid yourself. Delta is trying to help Republic succeed. I'm not sure why.
Old 03-16-2011 | 06:50 AM
  #61688  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

I believe DAL owns 16% of either SA or RAH. Interesting, isn't it?
Old 03-16-2011 | 07:00 AM
  #61689  
newKnow's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
Default

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.
If what you say is true, and a company or anything else was structured to get around any part of our contract, this is the perfect time to go to court to fight it. Just because it appears they have legally out maneuvered us, it does not mean we should approve the tactic by non-action.

The is a such thing as negotiating and contracting in good faith. If any party to a contract purposely acts in a way that is counter to the understanding of the agreement, I would argue that that party is in breach. Period.
Old 03-16-2011 | 07:02 AM
  #61690  
scambo1's Avatar
The Brown Dot +1
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
first, like dirty said, we don't have an SLI with comair, asa, skywest, chq, etc.

second, sure when you buy a ticket on delta to nrt you may at some point fly on a dci carrier or the oversized dci carrier known as alaska, but that's all a part of the scope arrangement.

i don't see how this passes the test. The PWA defines an air carrier as: a citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or indirectly, to provide air transportation.

I see both the Midwest flying on the E190s and the Frontier flying on E190s and A319s is in violation of 1.D.2.

RAH has has the power or right to manage or direct the management of all or substantially all of the other carriers operations, that's control according to section 1. Their pilots are all on 1 list, how that's not operating in essence as a single carrier is beyond me.

All of this started when CHQ got caught by APA back in 03 or 04. APA needs to step back in and do something about it, for the sake of Delta pilots.

I see it exactly the same. You have to use the definitions, not just the scope language.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22617
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices