Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-15-2012, 04:24 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
And where did you get that info?
Break over?
Back to the salt mines!
04-15-2012, 04:30 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
We have good guys on our NC and good Reps. Sending in a DPA card undermines their work.
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Thus, it isn't an action a "scope hawk" would take.
Carl
04-15-2012, 04:32 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
[QUOTE=Scoop;1169831]
Here's the deal with scope IMO. It IS black or white. There is no shade of gray. Why?
Because ANY promise of, or positive change to, the contract, can be changed later to a negative WITHOUT memrat.
It is with this thought process that I am mindful of any change to scope...Now don't get me wrong, what appears to be a positive change (when you read it) will be exploited by the company to be potentially a bad thing for us...There is NO ironclad scope language short of SWA scope, and we can be pretty sure that is not coming our way.
Originally Posted by gloopy
Here's where we, as high minded, intelligent, type A personality, ridiculously good looking pilot types tend to step on our own tails.
Theoretically what you said, in its entirety, could be interpreted as a net positive.
BUT!!!!<—there's a very big but here though
Gloopy,
Don't misunderstand me - I don't even take it as a net positive. Even if it was truly 100% net positive today - what would it be in two or three years down the road?
Something is up with Scope, I don't know what it is, but I am sure we will all find out soon enough. We definitely need to improve our Scope and that is the problem. Some things are obvious improvements but others are in the eye of the beholder and that will be tricky.
Is 10 more 76 seaters allowed with 100 Fifty seaters parked - good or bad? Some will say its good, others will say Fifty seaters are going away anyway. Is that selling Scope? What are we buying Scope with - other Scope? What if DCI departures go from 45% (theoretical) domestic to 25% but we allow them to convert some 70 seaters to 76 seats?
You say that if we agree to sell Scope we just have to settle on a price - and I agree with you on that. What I am unsure of is Scope for Scope is indeed selling Scope. Like I said I don't have the answers to these questions but as a narrow body FO I am very concerned and have attended a PUB event (SAN) and e-mailed my Reps - as we all should do.
DALPA will probably come to us with some sort of deal on Scope - it may be good, it may be great (doubtful), it may be foolish and imprudent but something is brewing.
Scoop
Theoretically what you said, in its entirety, could be interpreted as a net positive.
BUT!!!!<—there's a very big but here though
Gloopy,
Don't misunderstand me - I don't even take it as a net positive. Even if it was truly 100% net positive today - what would it be in two or three years down the road?
Something is up with Scope, I don't know what it is, but I am sure we will all find out soon enough. We definitely need to improve our Scope and that is the problem. Some things are obvious improvements but others are in the eye of the beholder and that will be tricky.
Is 10 more 76 seaters allowed with 100 Fifty seaters parked - good or bad? Some will say its good, others will say Fifty seaters are going away anyway. Is that selling Scope? What are we buying Scope with - other Scope? What if DCI departures go from 45% (theoretical) domestic to 25% but we allow them to convert some 70 seaters to 76 seats?
You say that if we agree to sell Scope we just have to settle on a price - and I agree with you on that. What I am unsure of is Scope for Scope is indeed selling Scope. Like I said I don't have the answers to these questions but as a narrow body FO I am very concerned and have attended a PUB event (SAN) and e-mailed my Reps - as we all should do.
DALPA will probably come to us with some sort of deal on Scope - it may be good, it may be great (doubtful), it may be foolish and imprudent but something is brewing.
Scoop
Because ANY promise of, or positive change to, the contract, can be changed later to a negative WITHOUT memrat.
It is with this thought process that I am mindful of any change to scope...Now don't get me wrong, what appears to be a positive change (when you read it) will be exploited by the company to be potentially a bad thing for us...There is NO ironclad scope language short of SWA scope, and we can be pretty sure that is not coming our way.
04-15-2012, 04:34 PM
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,868
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
My suggestion is to look past seat size and see the numbers management uses in their evaluations, cost per seat mile. (ask the Company, or ALPA, if you don't agree with the numbers I have posted) These are potentially 757 replacements. It would be a mistake to allow more of these fourth gen jets to be outsourced.
We have good guys on our NC and good Reps. Sending in a DPA card undermines their work. Thus, it isn't an action a "scope hawk" would take.
If it is necessary to attempt to "undo" a TA, then it will be time to send in a card for a representational election. Understand clearly that is the first step towards becoming US Air. That's a very severe, desperate, measure. We are not there and I don't think we are going there.
We have good guys on our NC and good Reps. Sending in a DPA card undermines their work. Thus, it isn't an action a "scope hawk" would take.
If it is necessary to attempt to "undo" a TA, then it will be time to send in a card for a representational election. Understand clearly that is the first step towards becoming US Air. That's a very severe, desperate, measure. We are not there and I don't think we are going there.
Bar,
I am of the mind that competition is good. I personally have noticed an improvement in DALPA since the DPA move started and I think they got a wake up call with how many card were sent in and perhaps upped their game. I do not necessarily advocate replacing DALPA, in fact I trust my Reps and think they do a good job. On the other hand I also think this is now pretty much an academic argument since we are in section 6 with DALPA in charge - thats OK with me.
If on the other hand as you say above outsourcing 4th generation jets would be a big mistake (I agree) - Do you think DALPA would be more or less aggressive resisting more outsourcing since the DPA became an issue?
Scoop
04-15-2012, 04:37 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Position: DAL
Posts: 623
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
We have good guys on our NC and good Reps. Sending in a DPA card undermines their work.
That would be a bit dictatorial/undemocratic, don't you think?
The concept here is "accountability." It's in short supply within the ranks of DALPA and ALPA.
04-15-2012, 04:37 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by Scoop
Bar,
I am of the mind that competition is good. I personally have noticed an improvement in DALPA since the DPA move started and I think they got a wake up call with how many card were sent in and perhaps upped their game. I do not necessarily advocate replacing DALPA, in fact I trust my Reps and think they do a good job. On the other hand I also think this is now pretty much an academic argument since we are in section 6 with DALPA in charge - thats OK with me.
If on the other hand as you say above outsourcing 4th generation jets would be a big mistake (I agree) - Do you think DALPA would be more or less aggressive resisting more outsourcing since the DPA became an issue?
Scoop
I am of the mind that competition is good. I personally have noticed an improvement in DALPA since the DPA move started and I think they got a wake up call with how many card were sent in and perhaps upped their game. I do not necessarily advocate replacing DALPA, in fact I trust my Reps and think they do a good job. On the other hand I also think this is now pretty much an academic argument since we are in section 6 with DALPA in charge - thats OK with me.
If on the other hand as you say above outsourcing 4th generation jets would be a big mistake (I agree) - Do you think DALPA would be more or less aggressive resisting more outsourcing since the DPA became an issue?
Scoop
I say it is.
04-15-2012, 04:38 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
If it is necessary to attempt to "undo" a TA, then it will be time to send in a card for a representational election.
A representational election will only happen now after we have a contract...if that contract is substandard.
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Understand clearly that is the first step towards becoming US Air. That's a very severe, desperate, measure. We are not there and I don't think we are going there.
Carl
04-15-2012, 04:46 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Top
Posts: 472
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Where are you based Frank??
Carl
Carl
Beautiful New York City.
04-15-2012, 04:50 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by firstmob
Aviation Daily
04-15-2012, 04:51 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by scambo1
Break over?
Back to the salt mines!
Back to the salt mines!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
