Excellent question Counselor.

With a bilateral flow through, the Compass pilots are a unique group because they are already going to be on the Delta list eventually, in staple seniority order. It would be good to offer them longevity now in exchange for being able to rationalize this fleet if that is what Delta wants to do.

IMHO Comair is a different case and unless Lawson's writings have been recinded, their MEC has taken a formal position against such a plan.

Does anyone know who the Compass Rep is and how to reach them? If so, PM me.

Straw hat poll - do you think your LEC would support this resolution?
* LEC44 - I'm guessing against a merger (anyone else?)

To get passed, this will probably have to go forward in a junior base.

We also need to understand some basic points about this process:

• Pilots can fly across Certificates and do so at Chautauqua/Shuttle America/Republic
• Pilots can fly across contracts and have done so Ransome/Pan Am comes to mind
• Pilots don't buy airplanes
• Pilots at Delta can't force pilots at Mesaba and Comair to do anything, it isn't a "cram down." Compass shares our Representative structure (another reason why we have a better bridge to begin working with Compass).
• We don't have to open Section 6 to fix problems with Section 1.

If anyone else has points to add, feel free. Anyone else want to co-sponsor something like this in LEC44?

The truly sad part is that pilots seem quite content to use the 76 seat airplanes as the replacement aircraft too.

Eric,

Pilots do not buy airplanes.

I would like to see pilots control who flies them.

Management can buy whatever they want to try to maximize profits. A union's first job is to stop the outsourcing of union jobs. ALPA has failed miserably at that core task because they have allowed narrow self interest to gain control of the bargaining process that effects the broad membership.

Still, ALPA is the best hope for restoring jobs. If we were able to pull this off, other pilot groups might see that there is a benefit to joining ALPA and thus the union would grow in numbers and strength.

Wrong!! Unless they are flown by mainline pilots. Midwest proved how valuable scope protectionisand both dal and Nwa saw first hand how selling scope erodes EVERYTHING! It's not just the junior guys effected, it's upgrades, schedules. And the senior guys getting screwed out of rides home on the rjs that they allowed into the roost to replace mainline flown aircraft. Everyone has been hurt by outsourcing even the pilots at the regionals have lost out on potential career progression.

I think the key to all of this is to stop playing be the same old playbook. Management has had over a half century to perfect getting around it. Three plus year negotiations have proved this time and again.
Fact is no management type every believes that pilots will walk out. (Read in essence a near idle threat)

I never said pilots buy airplanes.

Some pilots do control who flies them. Those pilots are at the majors and it was controlled by scope language. Which all have loosened throughout the years.

A unions job should have been to never let outsourcing happen in the first place.

9 retirement
 

OK, I've got no real good source or connection to management info., but this is what I was told in recurrent. The 9 CP came into class and did a little rumor control.

1 We are going to increase flying out of ATL to compete with Airtran.

2 They would like to keep the 9 for 5 years, which would be when the Bombardier C-Series/geared turbofan jets come out. He said those aircraft are 20% more efficient than the current 100 seat aircraft. The reasoning (which he stated) of course is not to be leap-frogged in technology/cost by our competitors.

3 He did say the 9 would not be doing any east coast shuttle stuff, as "they" don't want to put the GPS setup in the aircraft that he wants. Who knows on that one...

4 He denied the 29 9s coming out of the desert rumor, a very popular one on the 9.

My 2 cents; We have 2 airlines being combined, both I think need a 100 seat aircraft. One of the combinies has no 100 seat aircraft. The 9 is fairly immediate, it comes with a much shorter term commitment than more 76 seat RJs, and it sounds like the number of those RJs is currently restricted. Maybe the old Delta market doesn't need a 100 seat aircraft the way the old NW one does. Maybe the new Delta doesn't want to switch from the 76 seat RJ it knows. Maybe all the above and this is from a couple of 9 guys and should be subject to a MASSIVE grain of salt.

Maybe somone can set something straight for me. I thought I read in the contract that the "spares" were included in the number of aircraft we are flying. True? Does that count just for stuff in operation or does it include the desert aircraft? Thanks

I believe it counts, but it depends on who is counting.

Eric, I was just commenting on your comment. Hope you were not offended.

I agree 100%, bring em on.