MTB, Im pretty sure I saw a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Some JB guys were talking about a scam set up in one of the NYC concession areas, I believe. You might try searching for the thread and see if they got any resolution? Hopefully the FBI is tracking down those punks! Good luck.

 

In the name of scope recapture I think we should just start a PR campaign around a simple question, "if Delta Air Lines' is the best, why does it outsource YOUR FLIGHT to multiple regional airlines jockeying to be the next lowest bidder?" Or in fun bumper sticker size: "BITTER ABOUT FLYING ON THE LOWEST BIDDER?"

Or a little more centric to our needs: "Ask why is your Delta flight not being flown by Delta pilots?

The connotation on that last question would be a problem for ALPA to run with because how can ALPA in good faith say Delta Air Lines pilots are better than Pinnacle/Comair/ExpressJet/Alaska/Compass pilots who are also ALPA?

The general direction here though is, shame them out of regional service and bring Delta passengers home to Delta Air Lines.

 

Nothing was taken out of context. You asked for opinions to gauge a response to a proposal that in your opinion improved scope by allowing larger jets to be outsourced in exchange for fewer in number. Pilots piled on with opinions that your proposal was not something that they would find acceptable. When your trial balloon came back all shot full of holes, the logical extrapolation was that our MEC should get the same result from their trial balloon and crap can the "re-balancing" version of a scope sale concept.

Don't know how you determine standard deviation from comments on this board (which were unanimous against your concept). Perhaps you are privy to the survey data which shows pay as by far the leading interest of Delta pilots. If so, consider that the survey did not consider whether a scope concession was an immediate existential threat to ALPA as the bargaining agent for Delta pilots going forward.

I support ALPA, but more so, I support my fellow pilots (even you). Unity does not allow more outsourcing, even if fewer 70 seaters (ahem ... unwanted 50 seaters) balance the deal. Management can get them, but a Delta Pilot must fly them.

Why not negotiate a lower DAL 70 seater rate that puts us in the game and give the widebody guys more money? That's more of a win / win than more out sourcing and really, the productivity of the larger jets justify more of a pay differential than we have now.

 

The larger problem for DALPA is their own participation in the outsourcing scheme. Hard to be publicaly against something you are on record for proposing and / or voting for.

 

i.e. A Delta Air Lines 737-800 = A Delta Air Lines E-175 operated by Shuttle America.

i.e. A Delta Air Lines 737-800 flown by Delta Air Lines pilots, served by Delta Air Lines flight attendants, dispatched by Delta Air Lines dispatchers, maintained by Delta Air Lines mechanics, serviced by Delta Air Lines ground personnel, boarded by Delta Air Lines gate agents = A Delta Air Lines E-175 operated by Shuttle America, a subsidiary of Republic Airways Holdings who also owns Frontier Airlines, flown by Chautauqua pilots, served by Shuttle America flight attendants?, dispatched by.... I get confused with them. Who runs that place again?

 

This is exactly my point. Which of these two statements is more specific?

A) We do not support any larger aircraft at DCI, jet, turbofan, or turboprop.

B) We demand as one of our highest priorities a significant reduction in the Alaska code share abuse and significantly fewer outsourced aircraft at DCI, particularly the larger RJs (borrowed from Gloopy, because as usual, he speaks for me).

I would argue they are on the same level, as far as showing our cards or setting the bar. And yet, our union made Statement A and not Statement B. I can only infer that there is some CYA going on with the thousands of RJ pilots they also represent. Also maybe some CYA with us - they don't want to make a strong scope promise now and then have their hands tied down the road. The problem is, I WANT their hands tied (at that time, in that specific area). I'm only one vote, but I'm basically unwilling to budge in that one area. Once the used car salesman gets you to name a number, he has somewhere from which to work.

Not to point any fingers, but I have noticed Slow and Sailing go silent when asked the direct question about reducing DCI flying. So, would either of you confirm (or guess, if you really don't know) that our MEC would also support Statement B above?

 

Don't know T well enough to reach that conclusion. But using someone else say, Randy Babbit, as an example ... it will be a great day when a generation of pilots who have abandoned unity and outsourced the jobs of those who they perceive beneath them for personal gain retire and no longer exert their selfish, destructive, power on our profession.

I use Mr. Babbit as an example because he's the only man who had enough integrity to come right out and say "we screwed up" when it came to abandoning the fight against alter ego and allowing management to outsource jobs to replacement pilots.

Hated to see Babbit go. He was hope for those of us who had been waiting for someone to "get it."

 

Increasingly, the answer seems to be the voices in Bedford's head.

You write so much that I agree completely with that your posts rarely get a response from Duder. So let this serve as a late night "thanks for your posts." You do a great job around here.

 

Okay, what leverage (outside of my brilliantly conceived PR campaign) do we have to reduce scope other than refusing to sign a TA? Which I am on the record as being fine with.

So the question is would you approve this:
What would you guys chose?

I'd chose B and have no problem saying that. It's a gain, assuming plan A didn't work then plan B, negotiate and increase flying here and decrease it there.

And why concentrate just on the 76 seater, the 70 seater is just as damaging and interchangeable and we have 255 in total of those. So give up 6 seats on 47 airplanes and eliminate 418 others. I'll be honest, if someone said A and we stood our ground that's fine, either way is not a loss from what we have now. But I'd prefer a gain.

 

Those voices I'm sure are starting to scream in his head. And the laughter from the F9 pilots is ringing in his ears. I bet he doesn't sleep well.

BTW, I hit 10,000 posts and retired. I'm actually not posting anymore.