Ahhh the old doughnut threat again.. No definition of anything and a hollow threat about what some will do. :rolleyes: What are big gains? What is a weak offer? Stop beating your chest and answer the question.

I flew F-16's out of Alpena many times. It's a 9000 ft long R/W used by the ANG for (mainly) summer training.

Notice that the any airline that has done better than DAL is left out of this comparison, as always.

Even an airline that has been through.... wait for it.... BK just like DAL/NWA.


Don't believe me. Check out Hawaiian. They have smoked us in post BK pay, benefit and work rule performance. And, no. Despite what slow and alfa love to try and sell, it was not a "sham" bankkruptcy that they went through.

No way the Colts pay the $28 million for a 36 yr old QB who they're unsure if he'll ever play again. He'll be released and picked up quickly by AZ, Mia or Wash probably. If they can trade him without the massive cap hit, they will but no way they pay that dough for him.

Yes, I do, but I'm not sure who can provide this enlightenment. Like you, I have also read that the 739s' are replacing an unspecified number of 757's, 767's, and A320's. From this, I can't conclude whether there would be a net gain. From the post about retiring only 40 757's, I can't make specific conclusions about how many total airframes leave the fleet. From the post that put the total number of retired A/C at 85, I can't really conclude that the right answer is "15 growth", because it's all about the timing. And it doesn't factor in the 30 options. And it's forecasting into a future that will mystify all crystal ball operators.

So I don't think anyone on this board knows where this is going. The company will have tons of deliveries, and tons of retirments, and they can tweak retirements so as to tune up growth rates (including to the negative) however they wish.

I still don't quite understand why Toga was puking over the assumption of 100 900's coming, and (presumably) 40 757's going out.

The Apple we left on the ground was scope, is scope and will be scope. This will continue until we all agree that we should perform our own flying.

Small jet scope in our JPWA was literally left over for last. In some areas the mash up was so nonsensical that it was obvious no one really considered it. For example, under our contract we gained flow down rights to ASA and Comair. Yet, that was not the intent of any MEC and behind the scenes resolution took place.

Then we had a 76 seat scope grievance settlement over conflicting language which was apparently so ill considered that the parties came away with differing views on their agreement. Call it what you want, but when management redefines our contract through an act of non compliance, it is a scope failure. (and I worry about the JV now for similar reasons, management is in compliance with the agreement, but only because the terms were made so flexible that anything is in compliance for now ... the JV is a very good thing, I just worry about whether it is going to be complied with)

More spoiled fruit existed in the fact our Compass question was not answered in the JPWA. It was the right time to set our course for recapture of large small jet flying. Eventually Compass, which was bought and paid for in mainline pilot jobs, was given away.

Your second question will be answered belowWho said you'll get a vote?

Changes to our contract, including those I referenced above can happen via grievance settlement, or memorandum of understanding. Our Joint Venture's wording explicitly allows for modification which avoids membership ratification.

Egregious examples exist at other MEC's where Section 1 job protection provisions all but disappeared on the basis of an LOA signed by a Grievance Committee Chairman (not even MEC Chair). ALPA has learned how to get things done without anyone knowing until it is far too late to fix it. I believe our current MEC is actually MORE trustworthy than previous administrations have been.

A cursory review of our Company's financial records reveals there is good money to be made in outsourcing. When I brought this to the attention of one of the insiders, his response was to challenge the numbers. (Hey, Delta Air Lines reported them, not me).

Our Company and our Union (in my opinion) remain fundamentally wrong in the following areas and these errors are going to drive bad strategy and bad results. These are:

• Is narrow body domestic flying a core part of Delta's business? If so, why do we outsource it to a producer who management deems inferior?
• If 47% of our profits come from the 21% of our revenues that we subcontract, how much more could we make without redundant, parasitic, management teams, maintenance operations, scheduling, training, lessors, lessees, etc... ?
• Why does ALPA think it is a good idea to outsource work which has better profit margins than the work we perform? How does that enhance job security?

The wrong answers to these questions drive outsourcing. Does management really believe Mesa & Mesaba are better run than Delta? If 76 seat outsourcing is good, wouldn't 100 seat outsourcing be better?

I don't think Delta's accountants considered APC scope debates when they tallied up our performance. I think the numbers are what they are. Those numbers show either "outsourcing is a good thing" or they show "that is a business we need to do ourselves."

Until we get our collective head right on what "collective" means (ie unity) our "collective bargaining" results are going to be less than they could be.

That's just gross off of the W-2's. I don't think my retirement is much better than his. I'm getting 11 percent right now. He's getting a 9 percent match. Mine's better, but not by much. His pay is better by a lot.

Now that the LOA 19 and JCBA are done and we've been living under it for a while, how come we don't know what ALPA asked for. We know what we got, but it would be nice to know what was asked. Did we ask to bring in Compass? Did we ask for more than 5,4,4,4? Did we ask for more DC, did we ask for any rest rule changes? I'd like to know that information.

It was actually me that was puking, & it's because I personally can't stand the B737. It's cramped, loud, & has a terrible overhead panel. Ergonomics wise it's a nightmare, & can not ever come close to a 757 in any category. JMHO. :)

There is a lot of misinformation out there and you have to pick who to believe. There are a hundred and one stories which are generated by one hundred and one "supposals" which are exchanged during the process of reaching an agreement.

Obviously one source of information is the agreement the Delta MEC had prior to the JPWA. I do not recall the changes, but we left some money on the table while our then separate MEC's worked to find consensus. (how's that for trying to avoid a food fight?)

But it does appear credible that Delta Management approached ALPA with a proposal to bring Compass on board under Compass's contract. ALPA's response (obviously) was to bring Compass on under Delta's PWA. Once it was determined that Delta would not be furloughing, management's interest in the deal (which was aimed at avoiding the problems with flow down) waned.

IMHO our MEC did a simply outstanding job with the JPWA and we got real benefits as a result of their work. Scope was left out, but likely what management wanted was to get a scope cut and paste more than anything else. In exchange, we got cash. If we had held our ground, as UCAL has done, we might not have done as well financially.