I hear this all the time, but no one has ever shown me the alchemy of how it will work - the career progression at the regional involves taking it out of the growth of the mainline unless you define career progression as moving up to the mainline. Most of the younger dudes want that, however the senior pilots controlling the regional MEC's are lifers and want that growth and career progression in the form of more and larger airplanes at their regional.

The pie is only so big and can only be sliced up so many ways.

 

Very true. It bothers me when I fly with guys that want to see 190s flying around at the regional level. Wanna know the easiest way to keep that from happening? DON'T CAVE ON SCOPE! Once they're out there there's nothing any of us can do about it except fly them like we're told to.

 

that is exactly the problem with ALPA. They have to represent to apposing forces and try and make everyone happy so they can continue to collect dues. ALPA is run more like a business now and has lost just all credibility as a union. That must be fixed and overhauled or a new representation should be found. I have always been more on the ALPA side of things but there is only so many times you can drop the ball before people realize that maybe you cant be trusted to hold it anymore.

I have hope that ALPA can be fixed but it will only happen if we have leaders that are really in position to fight for the pilots they represent.

 

With the last contract and the caving-in on the recent scope, it's pretty evident to me that DALPA is now a union that's "owned" by Anderson. Seems like they'll give him anything he wants.

 

Lets try and keep this in perspective. The caving in on scope you refer to was 6 seats in 19 airframes. It is almost certain the company would within 18 months have been able to do it anyway using Dalpa's numbers. So the Caving is allowing 6 extra seats for a limited period of time. The actual scope language did not change one bit and the company now agrees to our interpretation of that language. Had we gone to arbitration and lost the company would have been allowed additional airframes forever. Instead they get the extra seats for a limited period of time. I really would not call that caving.

 

It is caving, because as Section one is written they needed to pull the seats. We let them keep their interpretation for all of the firm orders. Of course we would not give them it for options.
Fact is that doing so, we let them keep the seats that our section one prohibited. It is violation of section one. ( I do not care how you spin it) Furthermore, if DAL actually had believed in their interpretation they would of fought for it. They knew that it was flimsy as best. We just gave them what they wanted.
It is kind of like the white lies my son tells, he knows I know he is full of it, but I let him get away with it any way. I am wrong for doing it, and he is wrong for expecting the results he gets. But he expects those results because he knows how I react.
Same with this. If it was really intended to be the high water mark I will guarantee you that DAL management and lawyers would have had it in their. They wanted to use this lame excuse when it suited them. Their lawyers are not dumb enough to let this pass.

 

Thank you for your insights. After reading your posts I'm not as mad as I was before. However I do think this maybe the straw that broke the camel's back for many DALPA members. I think it was clear when only 67% of DAL pilots voted for the contract; even with the MEC's scare tactics.

 

Uh OK, maybe if your from Illinois.

 

My last Alpa carrier had member ratification for all ta's, loa's, and miscellaneous agreements with the company. That would have prevented the last grievance settlement at Delta without discussion and member vote......can member ratification be adopted at Delta?

I don't think Alpa national had anything to do with this particular decision

 

That argument doesn't work for me. That's DALPA spin.
Those six seats are critical because they are on the BIGGER airframes.
If it was putting 6 more seats on 50 or 70 seaters then that would be one thing, but this is allowing 26 more 76 seat airplanes.

26 additional 76 seat airplanes are now allowed under our scope clause.