We're behind the institution that is in power. It has to be that way. There's no other choice. I don't like it, but it doesn't matter what I like. DALPA is currently in power, so we must support them. If another union wins out someday, we must support them. It's really very simple.

Carl

 

The only pressure point is the fact they currently have a competitive alternative where nearly 4,400 pilots have submitted cards. When that effort stops, so does the pressure.

But they'll also know it will take years to regain the momentum and the 6,500 cards. By that time, we'll be back in that "vulnerable" time of being close to openers being exchanged.

Moot point though. If this is what the pilots really want, then the in-house effort will probably stop.

Carl

 

Completely depends on the rest of the contract. I don't want SWA pay if it means the rest of the contract is garbage. Ideally, yes our pay would be above SWA, depending on other items I could give or take a bit.

 

Agreed - the contract is much more than just pay.

 

If we want significant gains in other areas as well (scope recapture???), that may not be achievable. There's a lot of work to be done and this thing needs to be a major step in that direction.

 

I totally agree. It's gotten to the point where it's wallowing. ALPA fails to deliver on this TA, I don't want to give them the excuse of an independent drive like they have for POS 96.

We're out of time now and it's time to unify the group and say ....

 

My 2 cents...

SWA pay (W2, however that is achieved) and reversal of the outsourcing is a minimum. If the rest of the contract is garbage, it still gets a NO vote from me. If the rest of the contract is great, but the W2's of our narrowbody domestic pilots aren't at least equal to the W2's of SWA pilots, it gets a NO vote from me. If we don't improve scope (at least begin to reverse the outsourcing), it gets a NO vote from me.

Just to recap. What will get a YES vote from me is a contract that achieves a minimum of SWA W2 for our narrowbody domestic pilots (with other aircraft in proportion to that), improvement of scope (reverse the outsourcing), and nothing in the rest of the contract that would make it "garbage."

 

Now that's what I'm talking about!

 

On the DPA/unity discussion...

You want unity? Here's what our MEC needs to do. Come out with a statement of objective along the lines of this: Make it clear that our objective is to restore our profession and put our careers back on track. That means significant pay restoration... something along the lines of SWA W2 all the way up to C2K+COLA. It also means scope improvement... to begin reversing the outsourcing. And no negative changes in other areas of the contract.

Sure, there will be a small minority of folks who won't want this for one reason or the other. But I guarantee you the vast majority of this pilot group would rally around this kind of objective. That's how you get unity. That's how you shut down the DPA effort. IMO, the lack of this kind of appropriate and compelling objective and the lack of effective leadership is the primary reason for all the apathy and lack of unity.

And one more thing on unity. Yes, we need it. Is it critical at this point in time? Well, we haven't exchanged openers yet and there has been no event or situation where we have needed to demonstrate unity... other than communicating to management that they are going to be facing a unified pilot group. And that bring up another question. If it's so important to set the tone/expectations with management that we are unified, then why is it completely unimportant (according to DALPA) to set the tone/expectations with management of what we are going to be trying to achieve?

 

That's fine, but first...show me the:






Then show me the:





And if not, hand me my:





Carl