Actually, we're both wrong. I used the word "ratify" when I should have used the word "approve". Our reps approve or disapprove the TA, not ratify it or "pass it on" to the pilots. Regardless, I hardly see how that changes the point of either of our posts.

I did know that, I was just in a hurry and not scrupulously accurate with my words. Your agenda is to find a large gulf between the words "ratify" and "approve". Grab a dictionary if you're so inclined.

Carl

I would submit that the Pinnacle bankruptcy was on the radar all along...

Clearly Delta didn't just discover yesterday that it would take $73M DIP financing to secure the Pinnacle's outstanding financial obligations towards Delta.

I sure hope you are right but historically that hasn't been the case. On the other hand, I do believe selling scope to finance pay rates is a non-starter for all...

Cheers
George

I still think Alaska is in play. We see that Delta plays its hand out over years\months and it seems we've been positioning our network to not compete on routes much like I hear the NWA and Delta systems were done before the merger. Heck RA is crafty enough I think to do double and grab Hawiian at the sme time.

Don't know about "fan", but I do watch Fox News quite a bit. I'm a conservative politically and you just don't hear conservative opinion at all on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc. You get conservative thought on Fox, along with liberal thought from the likes of Alan Colmes, Ellen Ratner, Al Sharpton (until he got his own show on MSNBC) Ellis Henican, etc. I like hearing both sides, and I just don't get that on the other networks.

I guess I just lost a bud. :(

Carl

You should know about myths sailingfun. Most of this post is made up stuff from you. Again, I don't feel like I'm getting my money's worth for the flight pay loss that goes to you.

Carl

On the radar, yes. But I did not see dumping the new 900's and keeping the 50 seaters. But when it was realized what the 900's were needed for (in the short term) it was forehead slapping obvious. Comair and ASA have the oldest 50 seaters. Delta management now has the airplanes it needs to trade to Skywest to renegotiate some 50 seat contracts. It isn't everything they need, but for now, it works.

As for Pinnacle / Colgan, it appears to be stabilized destruction. At least they challenged Phillip's $1.5 million "consulting" contact.

We all do. The difference is, your plan is to avoid the APA path by surrendering early and accepting a falsely computed number like 11%. Surrender is certainly one way to avoid a fight.

Nobody is advancing that thesis. We're all mostly advocating using SWAPA's contract as leverage to obtain their pay and work work rules along with their scope considering we're far more profitable than they are. The question I have is why you and some others are trying to advance a false 11% number in response to our union realizing that we're on to the whole SWAPA thing? Why do you do that?

We're ALL living in the here and now. You're talking about the past at APA and attempting to link that outcome with ours. Why do you do that?

Carl

Jesse, I hope you never leave.

Carl

OK padre, it's clear you're the latest to be reading from the DALPA talking points. The reason there is distrust is because DALPA didn't introduce facts. DALPA spun, carefully parsed words, and some cases lied. That generally produces mistrust.

I don't think you help your case (or DALPA's) by insulting us. We're not making emotional decisions...read the above. And by the way, that is a really old talking point. The DALPA apologists here were characterizing anyone interested in another union as "emotional" for years now. Even they've stopped using that one. Just sayin.

Again, your talking points are old.

New talking points are absolutely required if you don't want to be ridiculed here ace. Our decisions are based on being lied to and spun. Much to your dismay, most of us are smart enough to realize it.

Carl