Tim, You have been around for a long time. I am really surprised at your post. I know you understand the RLA. What you propose is specifically prohibited. You can't even have a national union. That is why ALPA is a association. DALPA is the union. When the RLA was conceived the idea of a national railroad union scared the living hell out of the railroads. They bought the politicians to make sure it never happened. The RLA is the result.

 

My financial planner told me something very similar about 10 years ago. I paid him a ton of money. I fired him the next day and hired a new planner. The new guy has performed much better, has been more trustworthy, and better represents my interests. His focus is on me. He returns calls in a timely manner versus in days or never with the previous guy as his client base is 1/4 the size.

 

Except that the fruits of an up cycle for most of my career have been very short lived. C2K was an abberration. The "fruits" of the down cycles have been catastrophic. Think about it. Carl - even though he is young for the seat he holds- should have been in the 10 most productive years of his career. But... BK happened. Not placing blame, but the fact is that he will never recover that lost income. OK.. so where do we go from here? Pattern bargaining for wages and tips is a disaster. There has to be a better way. I agree with Timbo in a conceptual line of thought that maybe if the association were truly a national organization, it would have the power to set minimum standards and wages.. Maybe we could get some of that oil revenue.

There has to be a better way.

 

We need Lech Walesa as the head.

 

What's the progress with Obama?

 

There used to be a thread for this rhetoric.

just sayin.

 

No shizzle.

 

Hey cheap airline pilots, I just tripped over these on ebay. I got plane ownership out of my system, but at the time would have loved to own a C-210.

1961 Cessna 210 time capsule!! needs a new owner!! 1961 Cessna 210 time capsule!! needs a new owner!! - eBay (item 230772048227 end time Apr-08-12 16:30:35 PDT)

1959 Cessna 172 nice plane for a restore!! 1959 Cessna 172 nice plane for a restore!! | eBay

Who can, or wants, to afford an airplane anyway.

 

QUIT with the spin zone you're trying to apply to my posts.

I didn't miss your point. Show me where I stated what you write above (..."ever"...how dramatic of you.)

My opinion...AMR, UCAL and USAIR's current books and circumstances hurt our ability to maximize our payraise in this contract. We will get a payraise...but if the pattern were closed (those 3 carriers paying what we currently pay) it would be an even bigger raise. Why have none of the three carriers that have higher payrates than us been able to exceed our C2K rates over the last 8 years even though they've been highly profitable and never been bankrupt?

Nope. I showed you an up pattern that was only closed by 3 carriers (C2K by DAL, UAL, and AAA) and those were the first 3 to the courts. The pattern got closed going down, with the legacy industry rates within a few dollars of each other. Again, I point out that with the rest of the industry in BK or self-imposed restructuring the 3 profitable carriers still haven't come close to those open pattern rates. DCI rates are exposed due to the bankruptcies that are now visiting their segment of the industry. They're not unlike our position in 2004-5.

Again, stop with your spin. Where did I say "lost cause"? You made that conclusion.

I wouldn't call PCL, Comair, or American Eagle "bottom feeders" and they're not all DCI. They're all looking at significantly restructured contracts. SkyWest, Inc., formerly the most profitable of the regionals is breaking even and losing flying to the "bottom feeders", and it is a big UAL provider.

Nice use of the term "showcase" Bob Barker...maybe you can throw up a picture of one of your "price is right" beauties.

Actually Bar referenced economics not being a factor...in his post about unity. (That is why we must separate unity from economics.)

 

Slow,

Not trying to "spin" anything. You responded to a post about recapturing DCI with the following:



Last time I checked PCL was in bankruptcy and looking for wage givebacks. CMR was negotiating a concessionary deal. American Eagle is in bankruptcy and getting 1113'd. Do you think the results of those situations is going to help or hurt your premise going forward?


It is from this statement that I referenced "lost cause." If I assumed incorrectly, and you disagree with this, my bad. My point which I will attempt to make one final time before going for a run is this:

Yes it will be hard to recapture 70 and 76 seat flying in house - maybe insurmountable. But it is also hard to get a raise with AMR in BK, UCAL, and USAIR floundering etc - but I believe we can and will do it.

Why do mainline competitors only "lower" the a mount of potential raise we can get, still planning on a raise, but when it comes to DCI its "

"Last time I checked PCL was in bankruptcy and looking for wage givebacks. CMR was negotiating a concessionary deal. American Eagle is in bankruptcy and getting 1113'd. Do you think the results of those situations is going to help or hurt your premise going forward?"

No spin intended. If we can surmount competitors with lower compensation at mainline and still get a raise, why do costs take on a more significant meaning at the DCI level? If I am misinterpreting you on this I apologize.

Sorry that "showcase" makes you think of Bob Barker, that really is unfortunate. I am totally amenable to any suitable substitution that you recommend.

Happy Easter.

Scoop