Moak said it at the C44 meeting where some of the 07 hires here presented and passed the resolution calling for the study of recapturing 76 seat flying (which Moak & Co thereafter ignored). He actually said it before the resolution was presented, but he knew it was on the agenda and threw that comment in as part of a sort of "state of the union" presentation that was basically crowing about how much smarter DALPA was than those dummies at UAL, CAL, and AA.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble but I do work for the airlines. That's something I'll freely admit. Just not who I work for.

I didn't expect you to actually answer. More or less for the reason that you probably don't have a good explanation as to why it would matter if I was a regional FO or a widebody CA. I do find it funny though that you feel little need to justify or defend your thoughts on here. Isn't that what this board basically does....justify or defend peoples thoughts about whats going on in this industry?

What is the firsthand/practical knowledge that I'm missing? Because I've seen firsthand how the outsourcing has hurt the current group of pilots as well as any future pilots. This is not an industry I would recommend to anyone because of the outsourcing that has taken place in the last 20 years.

 

Clearly he missed the fact that CAL hadn't give in past the 50 seat jet and then hired 25% of their pilot group after 2005.

I would have loved to have brought that point up.

 

And you refer to me as a one dimensional thinker? You'd have to gain a dimension to be a one dimensional thinker.

Sad.

Carl

 

CAll 'em as I see 'em buddddddy.

So, OK.. I think the extra $50/hour should be taken out of the 747 pay since Carl has a fully funded DB plan, is gonna get 14% DC... and is making $80 per hour more than the nearest competitor.. and that money should be used to bring up the 76 seaters to a liveable wage.

Yes.. you are... sad... and one dimensional.

 

I have not been reading the forums over the holiday weekend but would like to through something into the pot. In my extended family, I have some people on the management side of labor, big business and not applebees. I showed them parts of the TA and the change from our old contract. They laughed at how little we receive with the leverage we had. They had been casually reading about the Delta news for awhile, because I am a pilot with Delta.

Before all of the YES voters go running to the polls. Talk to people who are not in aviation, both in management and labor. They will give you the correct reality check. Management wins BIG with this one and we, as Mongo would say,” are just pawns in where choo choo go”

 

square, you keep bringing up Carl's DB plan in many, many threads..... jealous? That was negotiated during NWA's bankruptcy. DAL had the opportunity. GET OVER IT!

Oh BTW, you make quite a bit more than the nearest competitor too.....

 

As I said, I've just been curious as to your background. You've all but admitted that you're not a Delta pilot. Furthermore, I'm still unconvinced that you're a pilot at all. Oh well. It's your right to not answer me.

This board is not a place for me to defend or justify my thoughts, or to convince anyone that they should be thinking like me. I'm on here to gather information. Usually, I'm looking for rumors. Since the TA was released, I'm here looking at interpretations of various contract sections, with an emphasis on potential loopholes. I see a lot of good in this contract, as well as several things I don't like; in the end I may decide that the good outweighs the bad, and vote for this thing.

I don't think anyone looking at this TA considers it enough of a slam dunk to not only vote yes, but to encourage others to do so. I'm certainly in that camp; I'm happy to let every Delta pilot decide for themselves. You, on the other hand, are clearly an outsider, yet seem to be encouraging Delta pilots to vote against this TA. That's easy for you to do; you don't have to live under the resulting contract.

 

That's ok if you don't think I'm an airline pilot. For some reason if I said who I work for you probably wouldn't believe that either. Not sure what it would take and it doesn't bother me either way. I find it interesting that people seem to have more of a problem of me not saying who I work for than the message I'm talking about. (specifically outsourcing)

I wouldn't beat around the bush and not admit that I think you guys should vote this down for the sole reason of allowing more 76 seat airplanes out there. For along time people have always countered me when I bring up scope erosion as a thing of bankruptcy or bad contracts and yet Delta may offer up more 76 seaters in a time when the airline is talking about very large profits. Has your Union even/ever offered up what it would cost to bring those extra 76 seaters on property or on the flip side, how much more will you make by allowing those to be whipsawed at the regionals?

I think it is a very naive statement to think you (delta) are the only ones that have to live under the resulting contract. Every regional pilot has to live under the contracts that Delta, United, Northwest, Continental, American and USAirways has signed over the last 20 years in regards to scope. Just look how the majors have shrunk and the regionals have exploded over that time frame and honestly tell me that you (the majors) are the only ones that have to live with that resulting contract.

 

To tell you the truth, I could really care less about what the effect of voting on this TA has on other groups. Not like they have raised the bar AT ALL for us to build on, at least since the JCBA. It's kinda like I don't care what the Public thinks about this either. The question is, is it good for the Delta Pilot group or not? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

Denny