Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
08-29-2011 | 08:12 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
The Delta Nuance
The Delta PWA was negotiated under the watchful eye and focused leadership of Captain Lee Moak. I have written about Capt. Moak many times. What seems to set Moak apart is an understanding the industry has undergone significant structural change and the Delta agreement needs to embrace that change. For example, because Delta serves many small and medium-sized markets in the U.S., there are few limits on the use of regional jets 76 seats and smaller. Continental is the only legacy carrier that does not permit use of regional jets with more than 50 seats. This line in the sand keeps Continental at a domestic competitive disadvantage relative to the industry.
Mainline pilot scope has been quite the topic here at Aviation Articles and Commentary - Swelblog / Swelbar on Airlines over the past week. Some have suggested I drew the line – or heard what they wanted to hear - at 50 seats. I did not. To me the line begins with the next generation of small jets that are bigger than the current aircraft platforms doing 76 seat-and-less flying within networks. The domestic scope issue is but one scope concern at Continental. The real issue of significance is that Continental cannot implement the joint venture with United, Air Canada and Lufthansa without the relaxation of language contained in the existing Continental pilot agreement. There is a regulatory deadline to complete aspects of the joint venture and anti-trust immunity agreements. Scope is not just domestic.
This is where the Continental situation gets a little murky. Moak understands that the globalization of the airline industry will drive his carrier’s success. Further, he demonstrated his understanding of such when he negotiated a new collective bargaining agreement for the merged Delta and Northwest pilots. Moak accomplished something extraordinary in the history of merger negotiations in the U.S. airline industry.
The Delta PWA was negotiated under the watchful eye and focused leadership of Captain Lee Moak. I have written about Capt. Moak many times. What seems to set Moak apart is an understanding the industry has undergone significant structural change and the Delta agreement needs to embrace that change. For example, because Delta serves many small and medium-sized markets in the U.S., there are few limits on the use of regional jets 76 seats and smaller. Continental is the only legacy carrier that does not permit use of regional jets with more than 50 seats. This line in the sand keeps Continental at a domestic competitive disadvantage relative to the industry.
Mainline pilot scope has been quite the topic here at Aviation Articles and Commentary - Swelblog / Swelbar on Airlines over the past week. Some have suggested I drew the line – or heard what they wanted to hear - at 50 seats. I did not. To me the line begins with the next generation of small jets that are bigger than the current aircraft platforms doing 76 seat-and-less flying within networks. The domestic scope issue is but one scope concern at Continental. The real issue of significance is that Continental cannot implement the joint venture with United, Air Canada and Lufthansa without the relaxation of language contained in the existing Continental pilot agreement. There is a regulatory deadline to complete aspects of the joint venture and anti-trust immunity agreements. Scope is not just domestic.
This is where the Continental situation gets a little murky. Moak understands that the globalization of the airline industry will drive his carrier’s success. Further, he demonstrated his understanding of such when he negotiated a new collective bargaining agreement for the merged Delta and Northwest pilots. Moak accomplished something extraordinary in the history of merger negotiations in the U.S. airline industry.
Originally Posted by Bill Swelbar, 16 June 2011
Last month I had the honor of being invited by Wolfe Trahan’s Hunter Keay to participate on a Labor and Policy Panel at the firm’s Global Transportation Conference. I shared the dais with Dave Bates, President of the Allied Pilots Association; Lee Moak, President of the Air Line Pilots Association; and Sharon Pinkerton, Senior Vice President for Legislative and Regulatory Policy at the Air Transport Association.
Originally Posted by Bel Swelbar
Airline unions are just like the airline companies before restructuring; trying to be everything to everyone. Unions have become too democratic. Decision paralysis creeps in because an agreement must satisfy so many disparate interests – at least in the eyes of the leadership who may represent workers with a wide variety of skills, experience and education. With few exceptions at the local levels, airline union leadership simply does not lead. Rather they succumb to the pressures of the most vocal factions.
Unions need to start relying on professionals at the negotiations table who have an ability to divorce themselves from the rhetoric and the politics and instead focus on reaching agreement. They need to lengthen the terms of their elected leaders so that leaders will be less likely to overpromise during their campaigns and be accountable to members for the hard work of negotiations. Anyone can make bold promises. Real leaders set realistic expectations and perform accordingly.
This type of internal chaos every two years can occur because the union, at least in collective bargaining, is a monopolist. Monopolists have power. But the days of union monopolies wielding power as in the past are quickly coming to an end... .
Unions need to start relying on professionals at the negotiations table who have an ability to divorce themselves from the rhetoric and the politics and instead focus on reaching agreement. They need to lengthen the terms of their elected leaders so that leaders will be less likely to overpromise during their campaigns and be accountable to members for the hard work of negotiations. Anyone can make bold promises. Real leaders set realistic expectations and perform accordingly.
This type of internal chaos every two years can occur because the union, at least in collective bargaining, is a monopolist. Monopolists have power. But the days of union monopolies wielding power as in the past are quickly coming to an end... .
http://www.swelblog.com/
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-29-2011 at 09:11 AM.
08-29-2011 | 08:27 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,105
Likes: 100
Heyas,
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
08-29-2011 | 08:27 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Likes: 0
So, you are saying we simply made it easier on ourselves?
Ferd,
Again, we see saw our MEC creating a "conflict of interest." It is no wonder the DPA has built its platform on "conflict of interest." Our MEC handed them the lumber and the nails.
The best fix for a "conflict of interest" is unity. When you are ONE, there is no one else to conflict with.
Yours is an excellent post. The NWA screwed up with the creation of the off seniority list group, but they at least left a bridge to pull them across later. My MEC blew the bridge.
Ferd,
Again, we see saw our MEC creating a "conflict of interest." It is no wonder the DPA has built its platform on "conflict of interest." Our MEC handed them the lumber and the nails.
The best fix for a "conflict of interest" is unity. When you are ONE, there is no one else to conflict with.
Yours is an excellent post. The NWA screwed up with the creation of the off seniority list group, but they at least left a bridge to pull them across later. My MEC blew the bridge.
Compass pilots were represented by the Delta MEC. They had a Delta MEC appointed "coordinator." There were no Compass LEC's or direct election for those non-seniority list pilots that had potential flow-up rights to Delta.
There was no way to force Delta to integrate the CPZ seniority list with Delta's list.
There was no way to force Delta to modify the Delta PWA for desired scope changes.
Even had there been a way to either force CPZ pilots onto the Delta list or to modify scope, there was still the possibility (probability) of an asset sale.
That's the reality with which the Delta MEC had to act. Saying "unity" until you're blue in the face won't change that reality.
It's my view there was no bridge, only the illusion of a bridge. It's my view that the representation structure afforded CPZ pilots created second class citizens inside the MEC structure. I understand you disagree. In all the years of debate you haven't provided a what I would consider a path to successful "unity," just the slogan. Tell me how it would work in the real world knowing that there was at least one CPZ pilot that didn't agree with your view of the world.
08-29-2011 | 08:32 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
It's my view there was no bridge, only the illusion of a bridge. It's my view that the representation structure afforded CPZ pilots created second class citizens inside the MEC structure. I understand you disagree. In all the years of debate you haven't provided a what I would consider a path to successful "unity," just the slogan. Tell me how it would work in the real world knowing that there was at least one CPZ pilot that didn't agree with your view of the world.
We agree. Of course not having a seniority number makes a pilot a second class citizen. In fact, without a seniority number, they were not citizens at all! If this was a episode of CSI, the NWA MEC got Compass a boob job, stripped them of all but a Bikini and let them on the dock as the shipload of Marines came in. What happened next was no great surprise.
In the "real world" it would have been a minor matter to capture Compass (and thus fix the representational issue) during the joint pilot working agreement. The next "real word" opportunity was the question of furloughs as the first network rationalization hit during an economic downturn (and I applaud the action of the Moak administration to navigate those perils without my furlough), of course the "scope grievance settlement" was another opportunity.
Look, I want scope restoration, but I'm pragmatic about it. Where you and I get crossed up is when I go after our MEC for their hypocritical actions. To justify those actions they have created a false "conflict of interest monster." It is time we stop feeding the monster.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-29-2011 at 09:12 AM.
08-29-2011 | 09:11 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Heyas,
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
08-29-2011 | 09:39 AM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Heyas,
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
Carl
08-29-2011 | 09:39 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
FTB,
Bill Swelbar has my respect, although he lags many of us by six months to a year in his published findings. Bill Swelbar was one of the first "authoritative" sources who documented ALPA's involvement in the selling of scope (bargaining capitol). At that time such a statement was highly controversial (yet true & I had been making that point based on ALPA's own publications for years).
Back then (early 2010) Bill's opinion was that unions had learned their lesson and would not repeat the errors of the earlier decade. I (for one) wrote him, saying that while I hoped he was correct, several of his own data points were not in agreement with his own conclusions:
Bill's mistake now, is that he assumes outsourcing is necessary to operate a small jet at reasonable cost. He also assumes that ALPA remains intransigent on small jet operating numbers. ALPA will also need to embrace other stakeholders as a matter of economic pragmatism. (pilots operating across certificates using one seniority number)
Bill Swelbar has my respect, although he lags many of us by six months to a year in his published findings. Bill Swelbar was one of the first "authoritative" sources who documented ALPA's involvement in the selling of scope (bargaining capitol). At that time such a statement was highly controversial (yet true & I had been making that point based on ALPA's own publications for years).
Back then (early 2010) Bill's opinion was that unions had learned their lesson and would not repeat the errors of the earlier decade. I (for one) wrote him, saying that while I hoped he was correct, several of his own data points were not in agreement with his own conclusions:
- ALPA's politics have not changed. The union members maintain an obsolete view of mainline flying which was the product of vastly different revenue and cost structures.
- To maintain a pre-deregulation fantasy career, ALPA has systematically sold off assets which harm its ability to negotiate future contracts. The greatest, of course, is scope.
- If Bill needed an example, he need look no further than the Delta MEC's handling of Compass.
- Economically, a "just say no" platform was not viable as a result of the effect of other stakeholders who would assert their interests.
Bill's mistake now, is that he assumes outsourcing is necessary to operate a small jet at reasonable cost. He also assumes that ALPA remains intransigent on small jet operating numbers. ALPA will also need to embrace other stakeholders as a matter of economic pragmatism. (pilots operating across certificates using one seniority number)
He seems to look at this issue in two dimensions. He forgets that Airline Pilot Unions have also realized that before you can demand a price, the economics have to change. He really is short sighted in many of his points.
I just posted this, because, frankly, this is the stuff that people are spewing. Figured I would share
08-29-2011 | 09:44 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Heyas,
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
The Compass sale was facilitated by one thing, and one thing only...releasing the company from the SECTION ONE clause that prohibited the divestiture of CPZ until there was a minimum number of DC-9 replacemen aircraft on the mainline property. Kicking the CPZ guys to the curb was just the end part of a sequence of events.
THAT was part of the JCBA that the fNWA guys had no hand in crafting. That was the way it was going to be, period.
Had the fDAL negotiators NOT given that away (and it was GIVEN away), we'd either still have CPZ or we'd have our DC-9 replacements.
It amazes me still that such an epic crank steppage occured.
Nu
08-29-2011 | 09:46 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Likes: 0
08-29-2011 | 10:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 0
From: B737 CA
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
