Thank You, I knew it was somewhere in there, just couldn't pin down where...

 

Not wildly swinging at shadows, and there is plenty of truth to what I say. Just because you disagree doesn't mean that I'm incorrect.

I'm asking to see evidence to prove to me and many fence-sitters that DPA supporters have the wherewithal and ability to accomplish things that help the pilots of Delta Air Lines.

Don't tell me "it will be better" without proving that by actions.

(I have a contractor doing work for me now that keeps promising the moon, and will tell me anything I want to hear....but he isn't DOING anything, and if he actually does do something, it is shoddy and I regret hiring him, I believed words, not his actions and now I'm getting hosed.)

I want to see that the work being done is being done to a higher standard than what we presently have. Show me the Policy Manual of the C&BL that are going to be used! If they are good, start implementing them now!

I don't have heartburn with DPA letterhead, I have heartburn with people who make claims and use extremely emotional words to enact something that I view as a business decision.

No, its not false, I grant completely that the cards in so far had little to nothing to do with a TWA announcement(maybe one or two guys saw it coming though). I think some percentage of the cards still coming in will be just what the previous ones were, but I think the impetus to put it over the top will be if there is a judgement on damages that puts the union out of business or forces an assessment onto the pilots that will be expensive to pay off.

If splitting from ALPA is what will ensure the Delta Pilots escape paying damages for a court case that they had no part in causing, I would have to consider going along with that plan, provided there was a strong transition team and that the "DPA team" would include the current/outgoing admin to build a team that can move forward together and keep the functions and duties of the union on track to benefit ALL Delta Pilots.

 

It is definitely not a no-brainer. Sounds a lot like some of the goodies DAL used to have in our contracts. Obviously some have it pretty good..... right now. Who is to say what the future holds?

Guys gamble by leaving for the majors while others gamble and extrapolate the present into the future. Neither strategy is risk free. I don't think economic pressure on connection carriers will decrease. So what does the future hold for connection carriers who don't contol costs, like trips touching etc? I don't know, but looking at the COMAIR situation does not present a pretty picture.

So are senior guys at commuters wise or foolish for staying put? Who knows? I certainly don't, but either does anyone else.

Scoop

 

JADIP,

Agree 100%. As a LAX 737 guy, trip constructiopn is my number 3 contract priority behind Scope and pay. Our trips blow. Even if I was the number 1 guy I would often have a hard time picking out any trip that appeals to me.

With that being said howevwer, I can also look back to some of the things we had at DAL and it is clearly worse now. I don't believe this is exclusively a FNW thing. On the other hand I also agree that FNW had some things in their contracts and some practices that clearly superior.

Scoop

 

It's on a drop down menu in iCrew.


I couldn't even hold a line with 2 weeks of vacation in August. Absolutely unbelievable... I was even able to hold a line when I was 5 from the bottom on the 767.

It is unreal how senior ATL has gotten since the merger.

 

I know that's what you tried. But you are totally incorrect.

I'm not accusing you of working for lower wages...I'm telling you that you are. If you don't understand that, than we're really wasting our time here.

You go ahead and do that. I like numbers. But here's your problem: If all management was concerned about was deflecting liability, they could just farm out all their flying and aircraft out to some outside entity. As long as the airline's pilots and contract provisions went with those aircraft and flying to the new shell company, the scope clauses wouldn't be violated and the pilots salaries wouldn't change. Liability deflected. There's just one problem...liability was never the issue. Lower pilot salaries is and has always been the issue.

I've not said any such thing. Your anger and emotion at being shown the facts are making you lash out without reason. I've only said that we major pilots have made huge mistakes, and regional pilots are continuing to make mistakes by working for far less money. This action gives management their main tool to justify the continuation of outsourcing, i.e., your far lower wages. As long as outsourcing continues, your shot at a major will dwindle. I had a role in creating the problem, you have a role in the continuation of that problem.

Carl

 

OK Gang, not trying to through any flamebait but what do you think of this. Recently flew with a captain who said that during his captain leadership class a year ago RA said "don't expect a payraise soon, these pension obligations are killing us"...

This is obviously something heard second hand, and a year ago, but what do you guys/gals think of this statement?

If you look at "Form 10k" (I know next to nothing about these reports) it says the pension obligations in 2010 were 728million and expected to be about 600mil for 2011. The management/overhead costs associated with those figures was about 300mil. Our profits were 929mil (excluding special items) so if I've found the right figures the 7+6mil numbers are huge. I guess I wonder about the whole statement... Was it this is how it is or meant to influence people a particular way. Thoughts?

 

It's a great place to start if your final goal is the fractionals, corporate or the military. If your final goal is the majors, you're only setting back your time frame and decreasing the odds that you'll ever achieve that by joining a regional. For new pilots who hope for the majors, the military will ALWAYS be the top choice. You'll be the best trained pilot among your peers, you'll be well paid and have the deep respect of having served the nation. Second choice would be a corporate gig, then a foreign direct FO entry airline, followed by non-sched freight. I did the corporate, then freight dog route.

I've explicitly stated that we major pilots CAUSED the problem. I've never said otherwise. I've only said that regional pilots are CONTINUING the problem by giving management their main tool to justify the continuation of our outsourcing problem.

Carl

 

I seem to remember some sort of agreement between ALPA and the company that we would have 3 pilots on JFK-BOG for safety since it's a long all-nighter into the mountains? Is this still the case?

 

The problem for you is: we already know how you define "accomplishing things that help the Delta pilots." Your definition of that is working within the construct of ALPA. If DPA supporters don't do that, then we are a failure by your definition. It's an example of the black hole you're hoping we step in to. It won't happen. We know it's a dead end. By now, you should know that too.

What a great example. Sounds exactly why so many of us are supporting the DPA. You're describing ALPA to a tee. All talk and promises, but walking away from unity every chance they get.

You're exactly right. This is a business decision. Many of us have decided that our vendor (ALPA) has long since underperformed its one-time great reputation. The vendor keeps promising, but keeps failing. Now we want to fire them. Nothing personal, strictly business.

That is a totally different premise than your previous post. I'm glad you're moderating your view on that. Your previous post said this:



I would hope that too. But some current ALPA officials have said they would never lift a finger for the DPA. Those people should never be allowed in the transition or anywhere else. Because by those statements, they've proved they work for ALPA...and not Delta pilots.

Carl