Bingo. We need to deal with this or we will be in real trouble within five years. Part of the problem is all of these agents are over worked. I would put two at each gate. It always impresses me how smoothly the operations overseas run. Two to three agents at the gate, and all issues are dealt with quickly and with respect.

 

That's what I'm wondering about. In the April 22nd C44 Hotline they mentioned:
Completely agree and have always thought so. This is not a violation of our scope because what RAH has done is gamed the system and it's legal. The only way it'd be a violation is if the NMB was asked to rule that RAH is STS. As in period. The question put forth by the RAH pilots union was is there STS for representation issues? The answer from the NMB was the affirmative to the question asked.

We need a new question, is RAH a STS? < period. What ALPA said was they were going to look at the issues related to the legal definition of air carrier, as in, we may pursue a tact that will further define air carrier to say all the airlines within a holdings company is STS.

In May, did ALPA legal counsel drop this whole matter?

Status quo with RAH?

 

Sir, How about recapturing lost scope in the 76 seat range? Do you feel confident about this being addressed by the MEC?

 

I agree. I do not see the decision, which was decision on "labor" as the lynchpin, I see the "findings" that the NMB used to arrive at that decision as key. I know you and I have discussed this, and we agree.

I am not a rep, and frankly I have not talked at length with my reps as to why, but my deduction is that the contract was written a certain way, and legally speaking they are in compliance. It may have not been the intent, but it is the result. Just because we thought that it would help below 76 seat economics does not mean that an operator like RJET cannot use the wording to their advantage. They can and are.

What is needed to "fix" this is a contractual change. It would not stop RJET as that would be very costly, but it would stop future scenarios of this nature. It also is important to fix because of these metal neutral JV's that are the half step away from a holding company or Transnational that will be across many countries laws and jurisdictions.


I did not believe it would be dropped, but that a contractual, legal, or legislative change would be needed. Frankly, with the election season rolling around, these candidates need money, and big business is their cash cow. This will not see a resolution to our liking until after the election. Your only hope is the DOJ/DOT and I am not holding my breath for them.

My guess is, nothing will change unless we buy the change at the table. It will be a significant cost, because it is important for issues far bigger than F9/RJET.

 

Coming in an uncomfortably close second in the ranking, which compiled thousands of separate surveys, is the second-busiest carrier at Port Columbus International Airport: Delta Air Lines Inc.(NYSE-DAL), slammed for its tacked-on fees.

^^^^^^^^
Whew, a utility company edged us out for most hated company in America. I'm sure our size helped us beat the other legacies (who were mostly on the list). But somehow SWA, with their complete lack of outsourcing, didn't even show up. Huh.

 

We have nice people by and large at gates. Although I have a beef with the one who closed the door 10 early a few weeks ago on an ATL-BNA run and stranded my dad and others for another six hours despite having 12 open seats on the flight. But last night, I got yelled at by 4 passengers about the attitude of our ### agents. I have no idea what happened to them but I was none impressed when the paperwork hadn't been printed on a flight that arrived 4 hours late and at the top of the gate house I watched agents struggle to find a cheat sheet to help them print off the paperwork. ?!? Flight was late again. And these weren't young new agents, they were just refusing to change.

We need to offend those who refuse to participate and we need those who are trying to be given the assets they need. These people are fighting WWIII with muskets, they deserve better.

One of the things I noticed between Delta and Continental for years now is the attitude towards the non-pilot group to the pilots. Pilots are respected here, not at CAL. You may think I'm crazy but trust me, I've seen very bad stuff in the CAL system. To me the Delta pilots have put their feet down on a lot of matters and you could see it, which is great. The idea that this is our airline for the long haul and we must protect it is a great idea.

Now the pilot who thinks the enlisted class should snap to and salute and read his mind, different story.

 

As you can guess I talk to everyone I fly with about what they want. As I recently told my LEC Chair, it is simple:

TO can state this in a two paragraph letter. "Pilots, we hear you, we see you, and we will fight for what you want. We have heard loud and clear that scope is not for sale, that you want not just a great job, but a great career, and your goal of restoring that career is job one for this MEC."

One run-on sentence like that and DPA dies, the pilot become unified, and our leverage goes through the roof. As I further stated to my LEC Char, legally worded letters are just irritating pilots to no end. The want leaders who will carry their water. You may argue that you currently see and do this, but when the pilots do not believe it, the communication is failing somewhere.

Call DPA whatever you want, but they have 25% of the pilots here sending in cards. If I were a rep or working for the Admin, that would get my attention. There are plenty of guys like Bar out there that are just as frustrated at what they see, but will not support a new union. I would venture to guess that it is at least another 30-40% of this group. In the last four months I have only flown with one pilot who thought that ALPA (DALPA) completely and totally had their back. I fly with a lot of the "silent majority" that we often hear about, and frankly, they are more upset than the web board malcontent. I mean that. I have been just floored at what they want to see as a min. in this Section 6. I hope they have the gumption to put it in the survey.

The point to my post is, even with all of the communication, contract comparisons, etc, guys are feeling that they are being managed, and they are over it. They want their union to state what I have said above. Do this, and I cannot see one more card going to DPA. This Admin needs to take the position that all of the reps ran on. It is not a stretch, and by not doing this, this last year, all of that communication has effectively done nothing.

This is what I hear and see every day with everyone I fly with. From 1983 hires to 2007 hires. The only one that was content was a 1985 hire. I get an ear full when the realize that I actually talk to the Reps.

 

I agree.

I thought it was brilliant, go after the legal definition of air carrier which if changed means RAH is in immediate violation of Section 1.

Far cheaper than pursuing a NMB case against against RAH and then Skywest then the next guy and so on. But doing this would inflict incredible damage to RAH's finances, and the IBT knew that when they pursued their STS case. And so they made it so very specific knowing or hoping that APA/ALPA would not have the resources or drive to pursue another case against the NMB no matter how much the NMB baits us.

But inflicting incredible damage to RAH's money train I fear would be frowned upon in Herndon where the mission is different than ours not to mention they own the lawyers we'd require for this effort.

So why do I feel as if nothing will ever be said about this again? The can won't be kicked down the road, it's going to be kicked to the ditch.

And I seriously doubt we could offer to fly for free and get that kind of change in C2012. So ironically we can't convince anyone to stop funding our competition because the DCI whipsaw trumps all, which is probably why we'll never be on par with SWA.

 

I really feel for the agents. We have one working a gate, and floaters that arrive to board the jet. They are always busy with this complex operation

 

We're big oil. It's fun to hate us even when it's not deserved but especially when it is. Outsourcing, thin staffing and what have you is not going to help and every IROPS reminds you of that.

We could and should do better. And one thing i keep thinking about and it'll probably get me redlighted off the DALS train here, but, we should've rebranded this entire airline during the merger.

Rename it something other than NWA and DAL. The people who loved us knew where we were, the people who hated us are likely the same people that hit the brakes approaching the airport as they try to read the signs and go into mass confusion and they'd probably think we were some new startup venture.

America likes startups. They hate big [name industry].