|
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
(Post 985516)
Be careful what you wish for. I am a senior pilot so it doesn't affect me, but maybe if I was close to the bottom I would be wary of "being like Southwest" at least in all facets. Now, I understand what you are getting at - if we had WN's work rules, we would need fewer pilots, so be careful what we ask for - I get it. But when you make a comment like this, it really shows that your head is not in the right place. If we cut 800-900 pilots off the bottom of the list, YOU will be affected. I don't care how senior you are. |
Originally Posted by Dash8widget
(Post 985602)
REALLY? Loosing 800-900 pilots wouldn't affect you? Seniority is only relative - the number of pilots below you is just as important (maybe even more so) than the number of pilots above you. At one point last year, I was number two in my category. But since there were only a grand total of two of us in the category, that didn't really mean much. You should absolutely care weather we loose pilots or not.
Now, I understand what you are getting at - if we had WN's work rules, we would need fewer pilots, so be careful what we ask for - I get it. But when you make a comment like this, it really shows that your head is not in the right place. If we cut 800-900 pilots off the bottom of the list, YOU will be affected. I don't care how senior you are. On top of all that, he's wrong in the first place. WN pilots get more time off, fly less, and make more money than us. All while flying a domestic stumpy narrowbody jet in "low yield" markets. |
Originally Posted by TheManager
(Post 985489)
Oh, and Ragtop. Most excellent post.
Hey Slow and call sign ***** ****. I do not endorse DPA. I have been an ALPA member at several other airlines. I have seen effective and not so effective MEC's over the days. I want to see DALPA reverse the course they are on and make the changes that will benefit the will and desire of Delta pilots. I will advocate for those changes, along with many other pilots that can be found both here and on the line. Your fear, and those that make a living on ALPA and not line flying, should be the collective number of unsatisfied members and not the DPA. It won't take many more received resolutions and tone deaf stone walling to energize these people. People like Ragtop. A well organized recall campaign can clean up DALPA much quicker than DPA can become our bargaining agent. Sleep tight.:) |
Originally Posted by Columbia
(Post 985539)
What if your first wife left and took your first house?
Or you have an adult child with a disability or illness that left them unable to support themselves? |
Originally Posted by Dash8widget
(Post 985602)
REALLY? Loosing 800-900 pilots wouldn't affect you? Seniority is only relative - the number of pilots below you is just as important (maybe even more so) than the number of pilots above you. At one point last year, I was number two in my category. But since there were only a grand total of two of us in the category, that didn't really mean much. You should absolutely care weather we loose pilots or not.
Now, I understand what you are getting at - if we had WN's work rules, we would need fewer pilots, so be careful what we ask for - I get it. But when you make a comment like this, it really shows that your head is not in the right place. If we cut 800-900 pilots off the bottom of the list, YOU will be affected. I don't care how senior you are. By the way, loose is when something is not tight, lose is when you misplace something. I don't want to be the grammar police, but come on. |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 985534)
This is so illustrative of what the entrenched ALPA apologists think of anyone who doesn't believe the ALPA party line in total. You are simply a forum loon with loony forum theories. People like alfaromeo flat out lie about the historical record in order to make their points. What he/she says about American is a preposterous distortion.
The NMB does not have or want the level of involvement that alfaromeo and his ilk want you to believe. They simply want the number of open items down to a manageable level before they come in to see if they can mediate a solution. It is true however, that as of late they are executing the political plan of our White House to remove the right to strike from any employee group in our industry that is too big. APA's mistake was not in what they were demanding in pay and work rules. Their mistake was opening the entire contract up for negotiations. This allowed management to sit back and do nothing, leaving all 300 plus items open. This played right into the NMB's hands and allowed them to park the APA NOT BECAUSE THEY WERE ASKING FOR TOO MUCH MONEY, but because there were too many outstanding issues for the NMB to mediate. The ALPA/alfaromeo folks are trying to explain away ALPA failing to even try anymore. They trot out entities like the NMB to explain why the forum loons think ALPA is a failure. Carl Look, don't believe me, why don't you read the letters that the new APA President is putting out to his pilots. He lays down the facts exactly as I said they are. Is he simply lying to his pilots? The NMB's role is to ensure the continuity of the transportation system, look in the RLA it states it there explicitly. They act as mediators, often for many years, to try to force an agreement and avoid disruptions. The idea that the NMB stepped away because the APA had too many issues is ridiculous. Where you come up with this tripe is beyond me. Their job is to work through the issues, no matter how many there are until an agreement is reached. The problem with the APA is that they are asking for $1,5 billion in contract improvements. Their company lost $1 billion last year. Anyone that owns or operates a business or ever has could tell you how that math works out. People who say, "well they can just raise ticket prices" should explain why AMR management didn't do that last year and not lose $1 billion. There is no path to agreement unless the APA makes some fundamental changes to their approach. The alternative is to wait until their airline is making billions in profits, which might occur a decade or so from now. So, Carl, you either fail to learn your lesson or you just continue your "internet act" of gadfly. You don't understand negotiations, you don't understand the RLA, you don't understand the NMB, and in the absence of knowledge you fill in the gaps with fairy tale fantasies. The APA board of directors is trying to change course, the APA President is trying to change course, the only one who thinks the ship is heading in the right direction is Carl. Of course Carl, a sideline barker, never has to explain to pilots why they have gone 4,5,6, or more years with no compensation increases. Carl can simply sit on the sidelines and throw bricks. Excellent work if you can get it. |
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
(Post 985516)
Here is the problem with your theory. It is not a theory; .... While certainly a worthy goal, the problem was that this goal was just made up with no regard for the market place they were operating in.
What does a house cost? It's not what you bought it for, it's not what it was worth 5 years ago, it's not worth what you hope it's worth, it is worth what the market will bear. That is market economics.... You can try to convince me until the cows come home that we are "worth" some compensation level from some years past, but it's not me you have to convince. It's the NMB's opinion that matters.... You say that the JCBA is okay but not enough. Well how about zero, is that enough. CAL and UAL are in Section 6 negotiations along with their JCBA and they have returned zero so far.... So we have SWA, which is the kicker. They are clearly ahead, but everyone needs to understand that they fly a LOT of hours over there. Now their operation makes it easy to fly lots of hours in few days, but in the end, if Delta pilots flew what their pilots did we would have 800 or 900 extra pilots right now. Be careful what you wish for. I am a senior pilot so it doesn't affect me, but maybe if I was close to the bottom I would be wary of "being like Southwest" at least in all facets. Maybe we just need to walk down the path of the APA for a while. We had all of these loony theories tested in the last round Chapter 11’s and they all failed, but apparently people have short memories. The American pilots are certainly fed up and chose a different path. Maybe we just need to flail around for several years and eventually the forum theories will be shown once again to be based on fantasy and not reality. The MEC will have a tough choice soon; pander to the loudest voices on the webboards or get money now. They can’t do both. Well, thanks to Southwest we know an airline can easily bear the following and still be profitable...
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../5/0908571.jpg |
Originally Posted by Silver2Gold
(Post 985585)
There you go................ messing up perfectly good emotional arguments with this black magic of "facts and reasoning." This thread has no place for this thing you call "reality." It is a place for what "ought" and what "should" - there's no room for actual possibility.
In seriousness, thanks for a well written, level-headed contribution to what is generally an emotionally driven discussion. |
Alfa, you've been spot on with your recent posts--
|
Originally Posted by TANSTAAFL
(Post 985617)
Or your second wife took your other house?
Or you have an adult child with a disability or illness that left them unable to support themselves? However I would say both of those are a minority for our over 60 crowd. I don't keep track but between the jump seat and the guys I have flown with that are over 60, a dozen or more, only 1 guy was staying for that type of reason. The others were staying because they could. When it comes down to it the law is 65. As we go further along this road those of us without pensions will be getting towards that age and I will guess fewer will go at 60 then do now. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:42 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands