Originally Posted by Imapilot2

This thread has always been a quick ref to what is going on, I hope that it is not ruined and becomes a contract ***** board for the next several years. No one is going to come to get the latest if they have to weed through fifty pages of contract crap.

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

Don't manage our expectations. We all know what SWA has, they gave the Airtran pilots a welcome letter stating it. SWA +1 for the 737s. And then go up from there. We made $950 million last year on bag fees. Nuff said, and the DPA card is going out today. Looks like DALPA needs to be scared into listening to their constituents. That Dalpa opener had better be good.

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

They, SWAPA, saw the opportunity was there and took it. DALPA is our agent. I want someone who believes in me, like Jerry Maguire in that movie. "help me help you" needs to be the attitude, not "reading a balance sheet" or "understanding hedging.". I want "here is what you deserve."

Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver

Does it really need to be about "pushing the bar higher" or "leading?" So big deal they didn't "lead the industry" or "set the bar" prior to our pay cuts. They were certainly competitive. Otherwise, they wouldn't be at almost our inflation adjusted C2K levels of compensation now. I don't really care if I'm the "highest paid." It's not a contest and I don't care about bragging rights. I just want to be paid appropriately.

BTW, who's leading and setting the bar higher now?

Originally Posted by 1234

Bill,
You say:
Then say:
hmmmm

Originally Posted by Check Essential

Managing expectations upward is acceptable.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

Do we have many guys regaling the pax with stories of their military heroics and resume? I've personally heard this a few times, and my brother-in-law just had the same experience on an -88 the other night from ATL-PNS.

No disrespect meant to our military pilots/vets. I just find the self-congratulating PA's a little nauseating.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

Do we have many guys regaling the pax with stories of their military heroics and resume? I've personally heard this a few times, and my brother-in-law just had the same experience on an -88 the other night from ATL-PNS.

Maybe I'll start doing my own version of this:

"Ladies and gentleman, you'll be relieved to know that I have accumulated many thousands of flight hours flying between such airports as SBN, AZO, MKE, etc. I have flown many light piston aircraft, hold type ratings in various Regional Jets, and am a Gold Seal CFII/MEI . . . . . . "

The only people who think pilots are cool are little kids and other pilots

No disrespect meant to our military pilots/vets. I just find the self-congratulating PA's a little nauseating.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

Do we have many guys regaling the pax with stories of their military heroics and resume? I've personally heard this a few times, and my brother-in-law just had the same experience on an -88 the other night from ATL-PNS.

Maybe I'll start doing my own version of this:

"Ladies and gentleman, you'll be relieved to know that I have accumulated many thousands of flight hours flying between such airports as SBN, AZO, MKE, etc. I have flown many light piston aircraft, hold type ratings in various Regional Jets, and am a Gold Seal CFII/MEI . . . . . . "

The only people who think pilots are cool are little kids and other pilots

No disrespect meant to our military pilots/vets. I just find the self-congratulating PA's a little nauseating.

Originally Posted by gloopy

I do see your point. However I can't fault people for being suspiscious given the track records, the inherent conflict of interest and what isn't said all put together.

That, in and of itself, doesn't "prove" ALPA will do a bad job this time around. But it does warrant significant concern.

If there is a case before the Supreme Court, I don't need to wait for Sotomayor's dissent dissertation to figure out how she is going to rule. Knowing her political tendencies and knowing that she has no problem reverse engineering a decision through ad hoc idealogical "interpretation" to match her pre-existing viewpoints, I (and everyone else) could very easily figure out exactly how she will rule on just about anything, many months before she actually does, and it isn't because anyone has ESP. Because of her track record, conflict of interest and what she says and doesn't say, and her history of lying to get the appointment in the first place for the sole purpose of being in a position to legislate from the bench to effect social change she personally believes in, I know how she is going to rule and how she will justify it in her written opinion.

ALPA OTOH isn't as 100% clearly defined, and their only current potential alternative doesn't have a long track record either, so its unfair to say that ALPA is 100% wrong 100% of the time. But it is absolutely fair to be guarded and suspiscious of the very institution that has erred very severly, in some cases consistently, in recent history and also has a pre-existing conflict of interest going forward, and that also been unwilling to firmly state what should be obvious; significant contract restoration, SWA plus and at least a very significant degree of outsourcing reversal should be no brainers. And all of that can be stated, quite firmly, far outside the specific confines of any offocial "contract opener".

SWA plus pay and scope, and an end to the 9-11 emergency bankruptcy interest and principal free decade long loan/gift/sacrifice. Those should be no brainers for ALPA but they aren't. We don't need a survey for that. Especially a survey that can be "interpreted" and double especially a survey we may never get to fully see. But even if we all say pay is number one, neglecting to make scope reversal the first priority is inexcusable. Scope is pay. Scope is retirement. Scope is work rules. Scope is vacation. Not only can Scope not successfuly be sold for any of those things, the more scope you sell the more you guarantee those other things will be threatened, sooner and more severely, even if they do get a temporary buff at DOS.

So in that respect, it doesn't matter what the survey says because scope reversal must occur for anything else meaningful and sustainable to occur. Likewise, obviously pay will go up, but SWA plus is the floor so even a year out of an official opener, I see no reason why ALPA can't be saying that. SWA+ is the floor for narrowbodies, and obviously widebodies will get more. SWA rigs and reserve guarantee are the floor. Significant scope reversal is the floor. Our opener merely reflects our fantasy contract, which will be well above those floors, and we will bargain in good faith to meet in the middle.

ALPA is clearly not doing that. Again, that in and of itself doesn't mean they will fold like a cheap suit, but it gives significant cause for concern that they won't state the obvious for the future given some significant errors of the past as well as an ongoing conflict of interest going forward.

No matter what the opener is, we will be told that is our will and its what the survey said, but we all know how questions are asked can effect the validity of the survey itself, and of course you can't ignore the laws of economical physics like scope. Even if its not high up on the survey, its still the number one issue, by far, because it is every single other issue long term. It should therefore be very easy to state as much. Significant scope reversal and SWA+ are floors, and it shouldn't be considered pre-survey taboo to state something as insanely obvious as that. When its not, we are all right to start questioning motives and intents.