APCLurker

The problem is, history shows that this "reasonable" scope concession will -not- unlock status quo PS or JV, or full retro, or anything else. "The companies needs have been met."

And the company has -already- offered up their counter to our pay proposal with a significant change to PS (non-pensionable +they eat first), even after we agreed (AIP) to these additional RJ's that you say are so reasonable. They already have not done what you say might happen.


And you have absolutely no idea if having to sit in an rj for a few years would, or would not lead to a "line out the door for 90 bucks an hour." I would tend to think the opposite: if the individuals are still at mainline, and can move up, it won't matter.

Cogf16

In a negotiation, each side has it's wants or priorities. It's naïve to think that the company wouldn't want to change CURRENT sections. Always been that way. So yes, retaining good stuff in our contract would be a "win". From the company's perspective, they could say the same thing. You really don't see that?

Cogf16

OK there's a rumor floating around by reliable sources that says there's a quid for RJ's and status quo PS, that's what I am going on. The last part is confusing. to be clear, I think few if any Delta pilots will want to fly an RJ for a C Scale and it being the entry level at Delta would be damaging to attracting top guys. The "line out the door" reference is to Gloopy who used those words to suggest there would be a "line out the door" to fly them. Not a chance in the world.

APCLurker

Doesn't matter what the rumor is. Right now, the companies stated position is significant change to PS, rendering your current argument that the rj's will get us a bunch of goodies moot. It is already wrong. We gave them the rj's via the AIP, and they responded with the cut to PS, and all the other inadequate items.

And I'll make the last statement more simple: I do not think having to fly an rj at mainline will have any detriment whatsoever to attracting quality applicants. I'm sure, being the quality applicants they are and such, that they can look further down the road than just a year or two in an rj for 90 bucks an hour (like 90 and hour is some sort of travesty).

Cogf16

And our stated position is 19/5/5 and no changes to PS, JV and other increases in pay and workrules. I'm merely looking forward to compromises on both sides. Clearly we won't agree to RJ changes AND reductions in PS or JV language. You sound like a defeatist. The AIP's are contingent on us gaining significantly in other sections. I'm confident the NC, MEC and memrat would see to that. I would never support a one sided deal you seem to think is coming.

APCLurker

I guess I am a firm believer in learning from history. You are talking about the organization that brought us that pathetic ta last summer. The same one that said it would be a "historic" deal (I guess they were right on that one, it was the first in history to be turned down). The same one that spent $1.3 million of -our- dues money trying to sell that pig.

And it seems to me that we already agreed to the rj's via the AIP, no matter what comes our way. Are you saying the AIP's are re-negotiable to eliminate the agreed to rj's if we fail at your predicted "no changes" to PS, JV's, or anything else you think can happen as payback for said rj's we already agreed to?

And I would never agree to such a one-sided deal either. But from what I have seen in these AIP's, it seems to be a repeat of last summer. And we haven't even seen the rest of the details. "The companies needs have been met." Seriously, that is what our own union said.

Dharma

I don't know of any AIP related to scope. Can you point me to the one that does? As far as I know, this has not been agreed to.

Cogf16

Can't argue with your concern about "history" with our recent TA15 and this MEC. That was a disaster all the way through. Although the AIP's seem to be somewhat "untouchable" now, we clearly wouldn't proceed with a TA, IMO, if the quids to the concessionary AIP's didn't meet our desires. Even if we somehow got to a TA, this pilot group would shoot it down. Neither the company, or ALPA wants another failed TA. Although the company is pretty satisfied with the status quo I'm afraid. Those "quids" I think, are no changes to PS, JV, increases in training and vacation pay, increase in DC money, and at least 18/4/4. For that, I could live with the 50/125 RJ swap, SL changes (but tweaked from the AIP) and an hour increase on the ALV. I have no interest in VB but if necessary, we could agree but have IRONCLAD language to walk away from it. Even then, I think VB is a big loser.

Cogf16

Excellent point. If not AIP'd then clearly scope is completely open for negotiation. But I will contend any AIP can be modified in the context of the whole deal.

Elliot

Simply put, you are wrong! It is EXACTLY this type of attitude that started the "RJ explosion" of the mid-90's. Who was first to concede all the RJ lift? Delta?

Since you sound like a person whose never known anything other than the Air Force, then Delta kool-aid stand, you need to ask the former (Regional) new-hire FO's their opinion about coming to mainline and flying an RJ for mainline wages, with a seniority number to bid another (larger) aircraft when the AE allows.