As Bar has pointed out even if they cancel the up flow the down flow may remain. If that is the case and with the language that is in the PWA and the LOA's Delta pilots are subject to some stiff language after they flow off the list.

DALPA has the obligation to protect Delta pilots, and a bad work environment at CPS due to a one way flow almost guarantees that there would be some that would have their Delta jobs effected.

 

That would get rid of 40% of the DCI jets right there - SkyWest and Chitaclic.

 

Compass could not have been sold for a long time under the NWA section 1 language. Had the company taken delivery of at least 10 77-110 seat airplanes, it implies that they were actively replacing the DC9 anyway (Compass IS the DC9 replacement). Too bad that part of NWA's section 1 didn't make it into the JPWA. Now Compass is not a category 1 participating feeder carrier; it's a category 2. By failing to transfer over the requirement for Compass to remain an affiliate, the door was left wide open for a sale.

Perhaps now there MIGHT be fewer seats at Compass for furloughed Delta pilots,while still complying with the flow provisions of NWA LOAs 2006-10 & 14)? I'm really asking: I don't know what they're up to, but they clearly do...

To me (not an attorney), transferring over NWA LOAs 2006-10 & 14 without any of the other supporting language (see below) would be like Trans States pilots getting the company to agree to the UPS contract, but without SCOPE. How long would that last? About as long as it would take to transfer all of the planes to another TSH wholly owned regional airline.

Parts of NWA LOA 2006-10:

"Participating Feeder Carrier" means a Domestic Air Carrier that is a Feeder Carrier (both as defined in Section 1 B.7.a. and Section 1 B.7.c.(1) of the Agreement) that has contracted with the Company to operate Qualifying Aircraft.

a. "Category 1 Participating Feeder Carrier" means a Participating Feeder Carrier that is an Affiliate of the Company.

b. "Category 2 Participating Feeder Carrier" means a Participating Feeder Carrier that is not an Affiliate of the Company and that operates Qualifying Aircraft that are owned, financed, leased, or sub-leased by the Company (not including the AVRO85 replacements at Mesaba Airlines).

c. "Category 3 Participating Feeder Carrier" means a Participating Feeder Carrier that is not an Affiliate of the Company and that operates Qualifying Aircraft that are not owned, financed, leased or sub-leased by the Company.

Offers of Opportunity (Filling of Vacancies)
1. A Category 1 Participating Feeder Carrier shall make 100% of New Positions (Captain and First Officer) and 100% of Backfill Positions available to Eligible Furloughed Pilots.

2. A Category 2 Participating Feeder Carrier shall make 50% of New Positions (Captain and First Officer) and 100% of Backfill Positions available to Eligible Furloughed Pilots, subject to conditions and restrictions that provide for efficient and timely processing and hiring of such Eligible Furloughed Pilots.

3. The Company will provide enhanced opportunities for a laid off Company pilot to obtain pilot employment at a Category 3 Participating Feeder Carrier. As part of the negotiation of a new ASA agreement, or to amend an existing ASA agreement with a Category 3 Participating Feeder Carrier, the Human Resources Departments of the Company and such Feeder Carrier will develop a mutually acceptable program that will serve to provide laid off Company pilots who meet all other pilot hiring criteria defined by such Feeder Carrier with "additional weighting" relative to other pilot candidates not already employed by such Feeder Carrier. Nothing in this program will guarantee that any laid off Company pilot will be hired ahead of other candidates who are not laid off Company pilots.

“Backfill Position” means a position (Captain or First Officer) on a Qualifying Aircraft at a Participating Feeder Carrier that becomes open when an Eligible Furloughed Pilot vacates that position.

“New Position” means a (Captain or First Officer) position on a Qualifying Aircraft that is created at a Category 1 or Category 2 Participating Feeder Carrier as a result of a Participating Feeder Carrier’s taking delivery of, or announcing firm delivery of, Qualifying Aircraft after the effective date of the ALPA Restructuring Agreement. The number of New Positions at a Participating Feeder Carrier shall be determined without regard to whether pilots employed by the Participating Feeder Carrier are furloughed or remain on furlough.


Some of the NWA Section 1 language that would have prohibited this sale:

B.7.c.(7)(d) Feeder Carrier Affiliate
The Company may establish a Feeder Carrier which is an Affiliate (as defined in Section 1 B.1) (Feeder Carrier Affiliate), and which operates 51–76 seat aircraft which carry the NW code designator, provided that such Feeder Carrier Affiliate operates in accordance with the following provisions of Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)1' through Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)8':

B.7.c.(7)(d)1'
The Feeder Carrier Affiliate operates only 50 seat aircraft (as defined in Section 1 B.7.c.(6)) and/or 51–76 seat aircraft for so long as it remains an Affiliate of the Company; and

B.7.c.(7)(d)2'
The Feeder Carrier Affiliate makes all pilot positions (Captain and First Officer, including check pilots) available to Company pilots in accordance with Letter of Agreement 2006-10 (the "Flow Agreement"), before filling any such pilot positions with new hire pilots; and

B.7.c.(7)(d)3'
The Feeder Carrier Affiliate recognizes ALPA as the representative of the pilots employed by the Feeder Carrier Affiliate; and

B.7.c.(7)(d)4'
The Feeder Carrier Affiliate enters into a collective bargaining agreement with ALPA in accordance with the provisions of Letter of Agreement 2006-07; and

B.7.c.(7)(d)5'
The Company or an Affiliate of the Company owns more than 50% of the Feeder Carrier Affiliate when it starts operating as a Feeder Carrier for the Company; and

B.7.c.(7)(d)6'
Except as provided in Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)7', the Company or an Affiliate of the Company controls the Feeder Carrier Affiliate, and the Company or an Affiliate retains more than 50% of ownership of the Feeder Carrier Affiliate, and

B.7.c.(7)(d)7'
If at least 10 77–110 seat aircraft have entered into active service at the Company the requirements of Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)6' shall no longer be effective, provided however that the carrier (the "Feeder Carrier Successor") may nevertheless continue to operate as a Feeder Carrier under this subparagraph B.7.c.(7)(d), provided (i) the Feeder Carrier Successor remains in compliance with the provisions of Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)2' and Letter of Agreement 2006-10 (the "Flow Agreement"), (ii) all pilots of the Feeder Carrier Affiliate have the right to transfer to the Feeder Carrier Successor, and (iii) the Feeder Carrier Successor is in compliance with the successorship provisions of the pilot collective bargaining agreement of the Feeder Carrier Affiliate. In the event that the foregoing requirements of this subparagraph B.7.c.(7)(d)7' are met, the 51–76 seat aircraft upper cap of Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(a) shall continue to apply to the Feeder Carrier Successor, and;

B.7.c.(7)(d)8'
In the event that (i) the requirements of Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)7' are not met, or (ii) the rights to pilot positions or flow rights set forth in Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(d)2' together with Letter of Agreement 2006-10 as they may apply to the Feeder Carrier Affiliate or Feeder Carrier Successor, are modified or terminated for any reason, other than through a written agreement between the Company and Association as representative of the Company’s pilots, the maximum number of 51–76 seat aircraft permitted by Section 1 B.7.c.(7)(a) shall be reduced to the lower cap (i.e. 55).

The above language did NOT find its way into the JPWA

 

Any idea why Delta doesn't pull pilots from Comair? ACL said in another thread that Comair's costs were equal to or above legacy. Take some senior guys off the Comair list and suddenly Comair's labor cost drops without having to give them more planes, more flying, or a fourth round of concessions.

I'll admit the top hundred are short and will stay put until 65 or the merciful embrace of death, whichever comes first. However, there are a lot of guys that chose Comair as a career but after all the kicks to the sac in the past 8 years, most are ready to go anywhere at the drop of a hat. Most have 4 year degrees and over 10,000 TPIC, if that helps.

Is it because Anderson hates Comair pilots as individuals, or because DALPA hates all Comair pilots as a whole?

 

The first and most important point is the DALPA does not hire pilot or maintain the seniority list. Both are company functions. The company can hire all the Comair pilots they would like. Its not up to DALPA.
Second you should do a little research on the RJDC and the infamous letter written to the Delta pilots by the Comair MEC chairman. There once was very strong support by the Delta pilots to work on a single seniority list. They could have attempted to negotiate something with management. It might have been a impossible sell to management and as mentioned they control the list and hiring however the support was there until the RJDC seniority grab attempt.
To this day I don't think many Comair pilots understand how badly they were hurt by the actions of their MEC and the RJDC not just for hiring at Delta but hiring at any major airline.

 

+1 What he said!

 

DAL pilots have a long memory on how they recall these events unfolding. Also, keeping ALPA happy by simply doing nothing with OH is quite simple for the company.

 

F-90, I just arbitrarily picked your post to reply to.
I haven't read all the posts(too many), so my apologies if I am presenting a hypothosis that has already been floated.
1. Selling both airlines reduces liability. Let Trans States and Pinnacle worry about liability.
2. It transfers a rather large training cost/footprint to someone else. If DAL hires a Compass Captain, they will have to train him, but it should be the same no matter whom they hire. However, Compass has to train two. First, a Captain upgrade to replace the one gone to DAL, and then a new hire to fill the F.O. position vacated by the newly upgraded Captain. If DAL really takes a large number of flow -up pilots, they have just dumped the lions share of training costs on someone else.
Obviously this is just my speculations and the true reasons may be much more complex, but mitigating the costs of the flow throughs may be part of it.

 

As previously stated by others, Comair pilots choosing CMR as a career was mentioned by JC in his infamous letter stating that CMR is a career airline and any DAL furloughee could resign from Delta to be a CMR pilot. And how many kicks to the sack did you take compared to DAL guys 2001-2005?

This is a classic case of what goes around, comes around. Perhaps the CMR pilots should have been more vocal when their illustrious leader drew his line in the sand. Funny, it didn't affect him, but it affects a whole lot of the CMR list now.

 

never mind ... bigger fish