UCAL pilots have MUCH more of a "competing interest" to DAL pilots, don't hear any conspiracy theories about them? USAPA has "competing interests" to DAL pilots and yet DPA hired the SAME law firm that had competing interests, OH GAWD!!!!!

Regional pilot groups DO NOT have any more of a competing interest than USAPA or UCAL.

Regional pilot groups only have a competing interest in their OWN company!

If Pinnacle Holdings or SkyWest Holdings used the same lawyers as ALPA I might agree with you.

Can I ask what you think the motivation for ALPA lawyers to 'tank our scope clause" would be?

 

I've not seen him say or write that anywhere. If I've missed it, please post it for us to read. What I have heard him say is that he wants nothing to do with the idea of fixing ALPA from within. I not only agree with that, but I'm one of many that advises DPA to never fall for that ploy.

What a terrible way to characterize the perfectly legal democratic process of trying to give people a choice. Shameful.

Carl

 

Non Sequitur.

We don't have any contractual arrangement that allows our flying to be outsourced to UCAL or US Airways. We're talking about Section 1 of our contract, Scope. We're talking about who flies Delta's passengers, not UCAL's or US Airways. Your example has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion we are having. Try to focus, Shiz.

 

Carl; I asked him when he was in the crew lounge and that is the response he gave me.

If that is what you advise, then why are you guys not taking out reps. There seems to be a disconnect.

 

How utterly disingenuous. It's already on the website as you well know. You'd find fault with a certified letter delivered on a silver platter. You just don't believe it, and you never will.

I don't think you'd ever be interested in leaving ALPA. That's your right. But it's terribly disingenuous to say that you might be interested if only DPA would do....

Carl

 

Who is "we"? The "pilots" of those companies do not negotiate with Delta/DCI... The Corporations of Pinnacle/Compass/ASA/Mesaba negotiate with DCI to do whatever flying the Delta Airlines Pilot Working Agreement deems "permitted aircraft flying". The employees of those companies have NO bargaining rights with Delta.

Oh, and if UCAL/LCC operated 50-76 seat jets and had a spare certificate they most certainly could bid on flying for DCI. (BTW, LCC does actually operate type that has a 70-76 seat variant and they own multiple certificates, Let's use their lawyers!)

 

None of what you've stated here would happen because it's such an obvious failed strategy. I think the best strategy is to end the negotiations process by agreeing to the SWAPA contract in its entirety, plus 5% and premiums for our aircraft larger than the 737. The NMB would be hard pressed to call that unreasonable given SWA is our largest competitor and are profitable as are we.

Carl

 

Ah yes. You'd be a DPA supporter if they would only send you that letter.

Carl

 

Oh, I just noticed I glossed over that last question. Sorry.

Actually, I think our ALPA lawyers have already done a pretty good job of "tanking our scope clause", wouldn't you say? We've had loopholes Carl could fly his 747-400 through!

But to answer your question. I'm not talking about further "tanking" our existing scope. I'm talking about improving our scope and reversing the outsourcing. If we begin bringing flying back to Delta (and away from the regionals), then those guys will need fewer pilots. The guys who have decided they want to stay at the regionals are really screwed. And a lot of the junior guys, while I'm sure they will be glad to see more hiring at mainline, would be furloughed... i.e. unemployed without a paycheck. So what's an attorney to do? Help us reverse outsourcing and screw over some of the regional pilots he represents? Or try to keep things on a pretty even keel so nobody benefits any further at the expense of anybody else? Tough choice... for an ethical attorney.

 

LOL. Man, you are Streeeeeeeeeeching now!