Very true. JC screwed a lot of folks.

Delta pilot animosity towards JC Lawson's CMR MEC and the RJDC may not be well understood by former NWA pilots, but the sentiments remain to this day. To what extent it affects Delta hiring of CMR pilots, I do not know. Probably their ill conceived strike has a bigger affect on that. But either one is not going to be favorable for them. Too bad. (said with sarcasm)

You really wanna judge the Comair guys for striking to improve regional pay and QOL? You mainline guys are the ones always biatching that regional guys shouldn't work for so little (after you gave up scope with virtually no conditions to prevent whipsaw). So criticize JD Lawson's thuggishness in dealing with the DAL MEC if you will, but the Comair strike was a giant step in the right direction that sadly has not been duplicated since and therefore led to their present distress.

"...Comair strike was a giant step in the right direction".

Uh huh. How's that working out for ya?

The successful negotiations before the strike were a step in the right direction. The strike itself yielded virtually no contract improvement, and did nothing but satisfy JC's bloated ego and shoot the rest of the pilot group in the foot. But that's old news. I'm sure it has nothing to do with why nobody wants to buy CMR today.

I still have no idea why mainline did not want to fly RJ's in the beginning but wants to now. I just cannot seem to wrap my brain around that one.

When they first showed up on the scene, they were a TP replacement and nothing more. They never imagined that MD-88, DC-9 and 737 routes would be replaced with 50 seaters. Just like NWA was sure that no DC-9 routes would be lost with the E175 at Compass. Now, if it's a short haul that used to be flown by a DC-9, MD-88 or similar air frame, it's pretty much always an RJ.

Wait just a minute chief, he didn't say that the Delta pilots had anything against Comair pilots because of their strike. He hypothesized that it might affect their chances of getting an interview which is decided by management, not us.

Our heartburn comes from the RJDC seniority grab attempt and the big F.U. we received WRT preferential interviews and hiring when we were furloughed, and the fact that although Lawson was the ring leader, the pilot group seemed to be fine with it.

Lastly, the big scope concessions were given in bankruptcy with a gun to our head. Believe me, it's those very concessions that kept myself and others out nearly 5 years, so we're very familiar with how they came about. Scope wasn't simply given away for the hell of it.

This has been repeated so many time now that everyone takes it as fact - I do not. Maybe a "majority" of DAL pilots did not want to be bothered with RJ's, maybe not, but I would be interested to know what the junior DAL FO's at the time thought. One thing that you can be sure off - opinions would have differed greatly.

So when you say "mainline" you are probably correct if speaking about the wishes of DALPA, but I bet a lot of FO's would have liked to fly the RJ as their initial Captain seat, keeping the flying in-house. Maybe there is a lesson in here somewhere about assuming a monolithic school of thought based on what the senior guys think. FWIW I think the current DALPA is doing a good job (current NC make-up for example) of giving weight to what the junior guys want/think.

And secondly, if what you say is correct, the short answer would be because DALPA has realized what a major screw-up its original philosophy on RJs has been.

Scoop

Good point - also, back in 2000-2001 when the RJs were really growing, there were two things that we don't have now: very high top-end pay scales and a defined benefit retirement plan based somehow on the top-end pay.

I wasn't here at the time, but I could a situation where the company said, "well, you can fly these tiny RJs for low pay, or you can give us scope relief for them and we'll increase the top end pay (and thus retirement)".

It's possible that the cost analysis in 2000-2001 made it financially worthwhile to all the Delta pilots (from top to bottom of the senority list) to allow the RJs to be outsourced vs flying them in house.

And this is why it is catastrophic to sell scope. Money and trinkets are EASILY taken away. Just come up with an excuse dejour. Terrorism, rolling snakeyes at the hedge table, bad economy, good economy. Doesn't matter...any manufactured excuse will do. Now the company HAS scope and they HAVE your pay raise and they HAVE your pension. You got bubkis.

The above situation is a premium example. Sell your soul for quick bucks now, and you will soon find yourself on the wrong end of a fool's bargain.

Nu

Jay, you have every right to be angry, but your frustration is misdirected:

(1) Prior to 1999 ASA and Comair were independent airlines who developed their own route networks using their own marketing, flying their own code. Their companies were very profitable and a few senior pilots became millionaires on Company stock.

From 1999 to 2000 Comair and ASA were bought by Delta Air Lines. Their code became Delta code. The back office functions of ASA and Comair ceased to exist, they were no longer independent airlines. They were operationally integrated with Delta. Under traditional ALPA merger policy these acquired airlines would be merged.

However, the Delta MEC wanted no part of a ASA / Comair / Delta merger. The reasons given at that time by the then MEC Chairman were:

* No military pilot would want to begin their career flying RJ's
* RJ's did not pay enough to be a mainline aircraft
* The quality of Delta pilots would diminish because qualified pilots would not want to fly for Delta if Delta operated RJ's at mainline
* ASA and Comair pilots were not qualified to be Delta pilots (web boards were full of allegations of ASA & Comair pilots being drunks, felons and lacking a College degree)

The Delta MEC was not alone. Other mainline MEC's saw the potential to outsource "undesirable jobs" and use the extra profits to subsidize higher mainline pay. Together, changes were made to ALPA's Constitution to remove the term "operational integration" in an effort to weaken merger policy.

To take advantage of this new outsourcing paradigm (popular word back then) Delta announced an order for 500+ RJ's in 2000.

The ASA and Comair pilots went to ALPA with a request for a Policy Implementation Date to trigger merger policy at the 2000 Board of director's meeting. This was a "seniority grab" since the ASA and Comair pilots were trying to follow ALPA policy at that time and not presupposing an outcome in the SLI. In the crew room my MEC Chairman briefed that "by aircraft size, or paycheck size, we can expect a staple." However a few crew room blowhards with no official position were talking that they wanted "Date of Hire."

The Delta pilots ignored official positions and ran with the "Date of Hire" allegations, although that was never a position and not evident on a single piece of paper. Using this false threat, the Delta pilots worked themselves into a frenzy.

At the 2000 ALPA Board of Director's meeting the ASA and Comair pilots' request for a merger was denied.

Now there was a problem (at least from the ASA / Comair perspective). Five hundred new jets were coming without any scope to control who would fly them. The ASA and Comair pilots were stripped of their code and had no control over any flying, even that which they had developed on their own prior to the acquisition.

The ASA and Comair pilots tried to negotiate scope which would bind Delta Air Lines Inc. to job protections for ALPA members. They feared outsouring of the DCI portfolio to non union carriers.

ALPA took the position that pilots could not use their scope to bind third parties. Duane Woerth wrote the ASA and Comair MEC's & Leo Mullin stating under no uncertain terms the Delta MEC had the exclusive right to bargain Delta flying. No scope which protected ASA or Comair would be authorized by ALPA National.

While the Delta MEC's interest in preserving its exclusivity at the bargaining table was completely legitimate and what they needed to do, the effect was that the ASA and Comair pilots were completely shut out of their own scope negotiations by ALPA policy which was based on a flawed legal premise.

The ability of two parties to bind a third party is common in contract law. We all bind third parties with the transfer of liabilities that we have in our own personal insurance policies. ALPA was mistaken, the result of lawyers which practiced politics, not law.

After being shut out, the RJDC was born from within the ALPA Air Safety experts and MEC's of ASA and Comair. The Cooksey part of the Ford / Cooksey litigation refers to a former ASA MEC Chair. IMHO the RJDC lost its way after exhausting every opportunity of gaining a change in ALPA policy internally and decided to go to the Courthouse. But, on the facts, they were correct in trying to get ALPA to change bad policy. They were correct about the threat of outsourcing and they were right that thousands of jobs were lost to ALPA members forever.

There is no factual basis for an "RJDC seniority grab" allegation. The RJDC only represented the plaintiffs, came along years after any SLI effort, was after a completely different set of goals and had no ability to represent ALPA pilots. Apples and Oranges. In fact, the RJDC and JC Lawson disagreed on Lawson's positions. In fact "RJDC supporters" were among the most fervent in seeing the benefit of having Delta guys who might want to come to ASA, come on over. After all, getting Delta guys on the property helped build the bridges that were needed.

Now what about the NWA pilots? Was their merger request a "seniority grab" ? Somehow we knew that a merger with NWA was needed. Was it because they flew bigger airplanes? In a word, yes. But, you can see in Delta's own merger presentation, the DC9 was considered less than worthy and it was argued those pilots should go to the bottom.

So we are in the corundum of representing pilots differently based on the airplanes they fly. There are obvious economic reasons for that, but, from a unity (and job protection) perspective ALPA needs to learn that EVERY job is precious.

(2) Yes there was pressure during pre bankruptcy negotiations to reduce costs at the threat of a gun. However, once ALPA adopted it's acceptance of outsourcing the question became "how much are those jobs worth?" In bankruptcy, bargaining credits were negotiated for selling jobs. Those bargaining credits were applied to other parts of the contract deemed more valuable than the junior member's jobs. This is particularly evident at NWA where the credits are discussed in the open, but the same thing went on everywhere. At Delta you simply need to refer to the notes around the time of LOA 49 & 50 (if I'm not mistaken). Of course those got wrapped up in LOA51. Things were moving quickly in the wrong direction then.

As a matter of historical fact no scope clauses were thrown out by any Judges involved in the recent rounds of airline bankruptcies. Like the "RJDC scope grab" was this threat also based on misinformation to confuse pilots into accepting scope concessions which were then reallocated to other parts of the contract? Based on the historical record contained in negotiator's notepads and ZipLines, I believe that argument can be made (perhaps not won)

Jay, yours and many other pilots' anger is misdirected towards straw men. When you figure this out you will feel a lot better when you see a f-Comair pilot & ALPA member show up to work for you in your right seat.

----

Again, our problem now that we have accepted outsourcing is the constant argument over "what's that job worth?" Violations of scope are used as bargaining opportunities. Once sold, the value of the "credit" is rapidly allocated and used up. In the next round of bargaining the credit has expired (or been nullified in bankruptcy) and there's no credit and no job to sell. Your MEC is weaker because it represents fewer pilots and less of the flying than before. The result will be poorer results at the bargaining table.

Scope sales are always a leading indicator for poorer results in future bargaining.

We really need to return the days when scope was considered sacrosanct. It will increase our power, improving our results and restore dignity to this profession.

Ad Lib,

Very educational post. I took the "seniority grab" phrase to mean not only the RJDC fiasco but as you said the supposed COMAIR push for DOH. I was told, and it was accepted as common knowledge, that around the time of the COMAIR strike DALPA agreed to try to bring the COMAIR guys on a staple but that they wanted nothing to do with it, and pushed for DOH - which was a non-starter.

I am not really sure who could positively confirm or deny this, maybe the then MEC members, but if true what a bummer for the majority of COMAIR guys. From your post I gather that this was not true, if so it is even more of a bummer, if as you say a few "blowhards" started the DOH myth which effectively killed any potential agreement.

Scoop

{edit}

heluva post. I have neither the time nor the motivation to track down all of your claims. You may me 100% spot on. I dunno.

I appreciate your accuracy of past events, and maybe there was alot going on.

What you can't dispute, unless I'm missing something from your blog entries, is the fact that during the "big" Delta furlough. Comair basically said ....

F.U.

Tell me where I'm wrong in this, and where they are justified. Yeah, we would leave when we were recalled. Of Course.

Would've went along way towards encouraging "good blood" between the unions. Just like the qualified guys would've left when their time was called.

I'd love to have a flow between us and Comair, pre-2001. After that, F'em. I don't give a damn if I'm a ComAir guy ever gets on with us.

J

BTW, {edit}

My reply was mostly directed towards your misguided slam on "YGBSM"'s post.

He didn't say that the ComAir strike had an effect on their ability to get hired or interviewed based on DALPA's views. It "may be" based on Delta, u know the big corporation's views.

Big Difference.

Just so I'm clear. You think a "xx" year Comair 900 Captain should now be a 777 Ca.

Not going to call you out. But anyone who thinks this, is an effin moron. Not sure you're that far off, what with talking about flying fatigued and with your flask of scotch in your bag. Some things you keep to yourself, rook....

Maybe at Comair, but not at ASA. When I started there in 1995, there was no marketing department, ans all we flew was DL code. There was no independant route structure, flown with ASA code. As far as millionaires, only George and John were. They were the majority owners, and if memory serves, there were no pilots with any stock of any sizable amount.

The fact that DAL ALPA at the time would give more thought to what military pilots wanted than other ALPA pilots goes to show you how defunct that union is. Some of these sentiments still exist today. I am not trying to start infighting, but it should be noted.

I got a question. So DALPA has the power to get rid of 60+ RJ's from these deals. Does that void there contract with pinnacle?

The contract to extend them to 2020 from the selling of Mesaba

You bring up a salient point. Trust me that is the interesting aspect of this. DAL has signed contracts for these services that go until 2020. Lets let the lawyers answer this question as it is one that has a ton of impact. I for one will not even project an answer on here for many many reasons.

Correct, but they and comair owned their respective codes; OH and EV. When DAL bought them they got the ATA code. When they sold EV (ASA) they retained the code. (Very important point might I add) It means that ASA absent getting a new code cannot sell their own ticket stock.

That would **** off a lot of people. You sell the airline with intent for a contract to 2020 and then leave it to the union to void it. Management tactics 101 .....I guess mainline wins with scope and management wins with less contracts and one less regional.

How exactly would the union void it? Both the unions and the regionals have legal binding contracts. It is just a matter of who budges if you ask me.

I just don't know where DL would go from here. You would have to cancel both 9E and CZ contracts and then hopefully find a new home for all the rj's. If you bring the rj's to mainline then there is also big $$$ in training/hiring. If the have to be sold then good luck I guess.

Staplejob sure seems like the easiest thing for all parties at this point.

I am sure Delta has a plan. I just really, really, really, really want to know what it is.

Weren't we just discussing a CZ staple resulting from the merger too? I thought DL pilots were opposed. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I do not disagree. That is management 101. ("We have a contract we need to honor DALPA!")

Like I said, I do not think that the transaction has taken place, just a agreement for sale. Lots of mileage to go before this one is done.

I am also not saying that DALPA would agree with this, after all it is not like this section of the PWA is hidden from management :rolleyes:

I do not believe that is how it was framed. The spin off the the CPS pilots to their own MEC was so that their pilots had a voice that was not the DALPA voice and DALPA would not serve two masters if it were to come to that.

In other words, would it be wise to have the DALPA MEC representing the CPS pilots if we were to merge?

Gotcha. Thanks. Just had to refresh my memory with this whole crazy week.

And the downside of this would be??

Nu

And the lawyers answers are subject to other lawyers answers, appeals, stays, injunctions, etc., etc......

nevermind...........

That just blew my mind. Makes perfect sense.

It is.

A staple:

• Provides enhanced career expectations for ALPA members at the effected carriers
• Provides job security for current Delta pilots by having seniority list pilots junior to them
• Makes ALPA more relevant
• Provides increased management flexibility to meet market demand

A staple would require that scope loop holes be closed by taking the number of outsourced jets off the table.

It's unrealistic though.

Of course they are. :eek:

I would settle for "Provides a job!"

Nope. No where in my post was that written. Not even close.

What was briefed by the MEC Chairman was that ALPA mergers typically went by equipment type or paycheck. It was reasonable to expect a staple. The same briefing was given by the RJDC types.

At no time was any SLI proposal suggesting Date of Hire ever made. Never happened.

Is there any way I could make that more clear for you?

In my opinion a staple would have been generous and also would have prevented Delta pilot furloughs. A staple would have been better than spending billions of Delta's money on outsourcing, then selling the results for pennies on the dollars invested. A staple would result in you and me being much more senior, secure and having additional career choices, if we wanted them.

My opinion is anything other than a staple would be ridiculous. For the senior RJ guys we could give them some sort of fence to protect their current category and status. That's JMHO.

You apparently have me confused with someone else. BTW, I agree with you that JC Lawson did a lot of harm.

I think it has more to do about protecting the quality and marketing of the type of pilots hired than it does with what military pilots wanted.

Both DALPA and DAL are very conscious of the DAL brand. Military pilots would flock to other airlines if they had to start at DAL flying a regional for low pay. I think they were more worried about losing the military pipeline than anything else.

Before the conspiracy theories go too far here, just remember that management merges companies and labor merges seniority lists after the merger is announced. There never was a merger announced between DAL and either ASA or CMR so there was never ANY proposals about SLI methodologies by either side. I know that somehow the ASA and CMR MEC's got it into their heads that they could force a merger by forcing the beginning of ALPA merger policy but they were wrong and the whole episode was a little bit of a joke. One could note that they never filed a petition for the two of them to be declared a single transportation system, maybe Ad Lib could enlighten us as to why that most logical step was never taken.

One more note, not one section of any major airline was rejected by any judge. Noting that scope was not rejected is quite misleading. If you negotiate changes, the rejection doesn't happen. Trying to assume that if no negotiations took place then no rejection would have occurred is just silly. Remember that every labor group that took it to a judge had their contracts rejected. 100%.

Trying to rewrite history to match your future assumptions doesn't make it true. All of this bunk about protecting military pilots and all the rest is just bunk. We didn't merge our lists because the companies weren't merged. It is as simple as that.

That's partly true and false at the same time. Do they really care about the brand that is flying 76 seaters and below? I would say that is DAL brand that they don't really care about.

K,

You win {edit}

good luck. enjoy the "clincky" ice in the single malt.

The filing of a single carrier petition never happened because if ALPA and management are both against a merger, there is no point in filing the petition. At the time, ALPA was threatening to throw the ASA MEC into receivership over their quest to secure a little scope, so who do you think would file a petition?

I was in complete agreement with you until your statement that we did not merge because management did not want a merger. ALPA never asked the question.

You make a very good point. I do think they care about the brand, which is why they've been trying to make the product as good as it can be.

However, I think they want to wash their hands of any responsibility. In other words, if a Colgan type of accident happened again, DAL can claim that it was not DAL aircraft or pilots ... it was a contractor. Therefore, no liability. Hence, the sale of Mesaba and Compass. Soon you'll seen Comair go away once the lawsuits are settled with the Lexington accident.