• As a result of a scope sale
• The credits for which were taken away in bankruptcy (we should have gotten those jobs back, just a lessor repossess an aircraft from the lessee. We owned those jobs)
• We represented them

Pragmatically, we passed on recalling those Reps. Perhaps Section 8 should have been given consideration.

We didn't need to recall the guy who made the Compass decision.
We made him National president instead.

Don't know why, but that's funny.

... and thus far, he has been a good President.

We will never know why Reps voted against their pilots, unless they chose to tell us. Perhaps ACL was right, it boiled down to pilots represented by our MEC not being perceived as pilots with the right to be represented by our MEC.

We'll never know on Moak's level (without subpoena power), but my hunch is that there was a quid pro quo on his activities that effected scope and our mid contract improvements. Moak has been better than Dick Cheney at keeping secrets. A Saudi, indoctrinated and supported from Afghanistan attacks America, so lets declare war on Iraq ... and hey what do you know, my old Company has operations right next door and you can outsource the war to them, what providence! (Haliburton's bills from 03 to 06, $17.2 Billion, next largest contractor Dyn Corp, $1.44) Moak gets contract improvements (which I am grateful for) that justify his promotion, but we've got to clean up a "representational mess" and "clarify scope language" as around 600 jobs go out the door and we stop hiring for a few years.

... and before anyone gets mad, I'm admitting what I do not know and can't prove. However, it is amazing how these fortuitous accidents come to pass.

What makes it more difficult now is that we are in formal Section 6 and the transparency is much greater ... that's a good thing, but at the same time it makes back room horse trading more difficult.

Great, thanks

I would not say we flushed those pilots. In fact we carefully made sure that every one would have his flow up honored and become a Delta pilot. There was a lot more to the representation issue then has been posted here. There were very strong legal reasons why the setup we had could potentially bite us in the butt later. Those 415 Compass pilots were not flushed and are well protected in the most important aspect which was the flowup.

The pay rates in the 01 contract were virtually fixed in stone before negotiations even started. The 3B6 rates on the 73N and 777 locked up what the final rates were going to end up being. Scope was the last issue settled in that contract and in the Chapter 11. Both long after pay. You keep repeating scope was sold. That does not make it true. Scope was certainly a massive concession but the continued statement that it was sold for pay does not match the facts.

It's called fear mongering and other tired tactics...

Seems like SF is back into the sales pitch mode.

Sailingfun and Bucking bar---you are both right on.

Sailing,

• My post dealt with the bankruptcy and concessionary negotiations, which I address as follows:

When ALPA, the Judge and Company Attorney used the word "credits" to describe the quid pro quo for scope concessions, what did they mean and where did these "credits" go? Alpha and I had it out on this and he finally gave in stating "I forgot they used the word "credits" " during the BK hearings.

The hearing records indicate those credits were used to offset demands for concessions in other parts of the contract.

Further, our contract is an amalgamation of the NWA PWA and they were clear that their scope concessions which gave birth to Compass were used elsewhere to balance concessions. So even if you were somehow able to prove Delta's hands were clean, you've still got to consider NWA's actions, which they promoted in writing (Zipline 10-18-04).

No union yet has pushed to test on whether a Judge will set aside non pecuniary job protection provisions in a bankruptcy. American may be a precedent setting case (and I looks as though I may lose the argument) but until then it is factually correct to maintain that labor protective provisions have been held sacrosanct unless negotiated away by the Bargaining Agent.

• As for C2K:

Giambusso and Pinho led ALPA against unification of Delta, when Delta acquired all the formerly independent code of Atlantic Southeast Airlines. ASA was an acquired airline and arguably henceforth a single transportation system after its code was acquired.

Never heard Pinho's thoughts, but Giambusso clearly made his decision on the basis of preserving the quality of Delta's pilots and a career path for his friends in the military. Those are noble thoughts, but they are not the thoughts of union leadership.

The results of the decision against unity are self evident. Even if "management was against it" from a union perspective, the fight for unity should have been made.

• In general

... if we did not trade scope for pay, What did we trade it for? Please don't tell me we got "nothing." Admitting incompetence is worse than admitting malfeasance in this instance. I'd at least like to think my job is worth something to my Bargaining Agent (I mean more than $2,100 a year in dues).

I know you hate my term "scope sale" but the record supports its usage and it has resonated with our pilots to the point that it is now part of the popular lexicon and serves its intended purpose - to pressure our MEC to stop trading in scope.

Further the term helps direct our pilots' focus in the correct direction. The DPA wrongly blames ALPA National for our scope losses and if they are successful in the promotion of this error, ALPA's gone (at least from here).

At the end of the day, I want to improve the excellent union and administration we have here.

Make them Delta pilots as part of the JPWA ... complex, we can't tell you, we can fly MD88's but we can't figure that out, attorneys say so, but if we did that Comair pilots would get Date of Hire ... problems all vanish.

Unity = Making problems disappear for pilots since 1931