Technically as you are so apt to point out, that is "opinion" not "fact".

I wonder if this plus the unxpected early outs will start the hiring gears spinning again? :)

And spinning for a looooong time (say 20 years or so). ;)

Not sure which rep he was talking about but the MSP LEC rep has said this publicly multiple times. The latest event was during the week they spent in the MSP check in area. In fact he stated asking for more then 10% initially and 20% over the life of the contract will put the company back in bankruptcy.

PG there is a reason that more pilots are buying donuts these days.

Okay, Carl, I was going to ignore your idiocy, but you once again teed yourself up here, so I can't resist. When United had their back to work agreement, they put the scabs above the 590 new hires that walked the picket line. Later, they NEGOTIATED to have the new hires placed above the scabs. A lawsuit ensued for DFR, Rakestraw vs. ALPA, and Rakestraw won in front of a jury (like TWA) and it was overturned on appeal. (probably like TWA). There are other cases that I am too lazy to look up now, but it has happened before.

I know you claim that there is a difference between US Air and our situation, but you are flat out wrong. I know this because 5 federal judges have said you are wrong. Their rulings consistently confirm that the Nicolau award at US Air is the result of a three party contract and it was accepted by US Air Management.

This is a quote from the Ninth Circuit:

The three federal appeals judges all recognize that the Nicolau list is the accepted award at US Air, that USAPA is free to NEGOTIATE a new seniority list, and that they have to represent both sides in NEGOTIATIONS. The seniority integration process at US Air is done, finito, over, end, conclusion, and any other word that means there is no difference between their list and ours.

There is nothing there about, well you haven't combined operations yet, so USAPA gets a free pass. Your entire theory of difference has been shot down in federal court three different times. Your posts run on testosterone and bull headedness coupled with attacks and ridicule. What you lack is any basis in fact to support your rantings.

ALPA is free to negotiate a new seniority list today. They could redo it by age, by height, by hair color, they could make all the junior pilots senior and all the senior pilots junior (Bucking, ACL you can stand up now), seniority is ALWAYS up for negotiation. It is difficult to do because of the zero sum game of the fact that for every pilot that gains a number, another pilot loses a number.

That said, USAPA has foregone all compensation increases in order to stake their entire Section 6 NEGOTIATIONS around NEGOTIATING a new seniority list. They have done that because DPA's attorney says that they can achieve their goals easily because negotiating seniority is like negotiating a crew meal. Just the same, no difference. Date of hire is the gold standard and thus impervious to DFR.

So, Carl, you once again miss my original point so I will state it again. I never said DPA was trying to overturn the seniority list but I can't rule it out. They can change their stripes in minutes with a stroke of the keyboard. As such they can be anything to all people. They say that they must complete their card drive by January to be ready for negotiations. When they blow that goal they simply erase it. How convenient. When they blow through the timeline to produce a constitution and base representatives they simply erase it. How convenient. If they decide they now want to negotiate a new seniority list they simply change their website. How convenient.

I said that I hear people talking about it in the lounge in DTW, you said that there were 5 out of 3100 pilots that believe it, a number you totally made up, but there are some. Could it be 10, 20, 30, or more, you have no idea and neither do I but you admit there are some. So it is not impossible that I overheard this conversation and in fact I have. Two other pilots have reported the same conversations. I heard this same conversation, yesterday when I was there. 'Hey, I hear DPA can get us a date of hire list."

So in every fact about this topic, you are just flat out wrong. EVERYTHING. I see why you respond with bluster and attack, because you try to hide your ignorance.

I think the main issue with any union is that they become too BUDDY BUDDY with management. The process of negotiating and fact finding leads to a lot of co-mingling and basically that thick line that divides management and the Union dissolves. Unacceptable.
Management will always use this "BUDDY BUDDY" moment with the Union to manipulate and interject unfound and off truth scenarios (We will be bankrupt if we accept any more than 20% pay-raise<--Bull $h!t). In which the union starts to take heed and believe and then pass on to their members. This is pure management 301 tactics.

The solution is to have absolutely no personal or off record INTERACTIONS with management. THE truth shown, spoken and proved is elusive. We will never be able to prove the truth with any accounting or books the company has, so its best to just DEMAND what we are worth and attack with our own company research data and findings. Think about it: 1) If American is able to buy so much metal with so much debt and a weak balance sheet and this Republic entity is able to operate a "failing" entity for this long, I really dont think Pilot labor is any issue to running a multi billion dollar entity like DAL.

Now if there was any chance that we are guaranteed a truthful exchange and negotiating tool, then all of what I said is "out-the-door". I just dont think the companies of today are truthful. And I think our Unions of today rub managements' back just a little too much. Keep the LINE that differentiates Management and UNION thick, please.

My observation and 2 cents,
TEN

Just "asking" would put the Company into bankruptcy :rolleyes:

My concern remains that they'll relapse to their old addiction of selling scope for pay. There are a lot of little data points pointing to the outsourcing of 100 seat flying somewhere. For instance, this report from the Denver Business Journal which quotes the President of Republic Airlines Holdings stating that Frontier's Airbus aircraft will be shifted into fee for departure operations.

CEO Bedford: Frontier Airlines well on its way to cost-cutting goal - Denver Business Journal

This press report, quoting an airline CEO correlates exactly with the rumor which started the negotiating committee food fight on this board. Frankly, I thought the rumor was too incredible to post (incredible, as in ridiculous). But this article from a news source experienced with the details of Frontier's plight comes right out and prints it.


The rest of the rumor is ... that in exchange for Frontier's Airbus fleet (flying, whatever) we'll agree to give Bedford or some other operator permission to operate the E190 off property and that we'd get a raise, or alternatively, we'd have some sort of merger with a regional and Delta pilots would perform the flying. The whole thing did not make a lot of sense. But, when you cook off the fat from he Eagle announcement, a pattern just like Moak's scope strategy starts to emerge. So maybe it is true, or parts of it anyway. Who knows?

We have a couple of open scope items in the form of Delta Private Jets and the Republic Single Carrier issue. So someone might cut a deal and present it as a memorandum of understanding which even surprises our Reps.

QUICK question on the supposed DPA SLI debate: does anyone have THAT much to gain by moving a couple hundred numbers that they would spend resources and countless hours creating an entirely new union just for that purpose? It seems a little far fetched to me. Now spending those hours and resources to get a much-improved contract and fix scope- that is something that would be worth the trouble.

I still have the feeling that if DALPA would publicly take a stand for us, that the DPA threat would not be needed. I think 80 said he heard something encouraging from a rep that eased his fear about weak contract negotiations? I'd like to hear more about that.

Oh, if you want to get really mad at national, take a look at the last magazine about the previous decade at ALPA. One of their crowning achievements (besides lasers and lithium batteries, which I stay awake at night thinking about), is the expedited crew access through security they have set up for us. Isn't it wonderful? Can you guys imagine if we still had to go through that long inconvenient screening line with the passengers? That would really make our day longer! Oh, wait...

You're making a fool out of yourself alfa, really. There is no legal precedent to redo an SLI once that SLI has been accepted by management AND THE OPERATIONS HAVE BEEN COMBINED. None. If you can find such legal precedent, POST IT!

The United scab situation did not even involve an SLI. The only reason the Nic award can be fought now is because it was never IMPLEMENTED AT A COMBINED OPERATION. None of your posts above pertain to Delta Air Lines because our management agreed to the SLI and our operations are now COMBINED.

The DPA's website (vetted by DPA's attorney) is 100% correct. Our SLI is unchangeable.

Carl

All in favor of a collective thumbs down say, ai? AY! I? i? AYE!

There was something else here:
He is losing money having these airplanes fly for Frontier so how about shift them to DAL and UAL to make more money. Which helps who? RAH. And then who does that help? Frontier. So doesn't that just mean WE ARE FUNDING THE COMPETITION.

How the ALPA lawyers don't see anything wrong with RAH is beyond me. Even if the scope language they wrote sucks how do you not see them saying we're going to shift airplanes from Frontier to Delta to make more money is not STS? If these were truly separate airlines they couldn't be shifted.

So does this mean they're not conserving fuel when they fly for Delta?