So what happens when Pinnacle or Republic or whoever signs a deal with Delta guaranteeing them to fly 737s for Delta in exchange for xyz concessions and furlough protection in their contract. Of course, the regiona airline's MEC negotiates for it and the pilots at said regional vote for it. In order to save jobs and go along with the wishes of its members, ALPA national signs off on it.

Thanks to it being written later on, the lawyers have more experience and knowledge behind them into these scope sections and it is written more iron-clad than the Delta pilot's scope section. In court, it prevails over Delta pilot scope.

An agreement like this, as others have said, could destroy the pilot profession. Outsourcing will officially go from "they gave the flying away" to "we took the flying from them."

Some may not believe this could happen, but it could. It already is with this agreement. Delta is contractually signing a fleet count with Pinnacle. Unlike an agreement to outsource like in the past, which is just between the two airlines.... this one is being negotiated and signed by ALPA and put into a pilot working agreement. It will make it so that Delta pilots fundamentally cannot fight to regain scope in their next contract negotiations. ALPA has already signed the dotted line allowing that outsourcing to exist at another airline. All this without Delta pilots even allowed a seat at the table or a signature on the page. And we all know that, thanks to history, once these things get going, they never stop and grow out of control.


This is really bad. In 10 or 20 years, this could be remembered as a monumental screw up by ALPA just as large as letting the first RJ be outsourced 20 years ago. This has to be stopped.

 

Has anyone seen the complete agreement?

 

Any update from DALPA on this subject? Bar?

 

I'm getting more and more lost on this one, Bar. As far as I understood the issue earlier, there might or might not have been a meet-and-confer failure, something we couldn't demonstrate, and Delta used their leverage to drive the Pinnacle reorganization, which includes the pilot deal, which now sounds like it comes with a semi-automatic flow progress, where Delta can take out applicants it doesn't want. And some have even said it might only be a preferential interview deal.

As far as ownership of permitted flying, we permit it, and Delta contracts for it. Seems to me each DCI carrier has a ling-term contract for their protection. How does this one break the mold, other than what I described in the preceding paragraph?

Not arguing with you, just trying to understand issues.

 

The problem, along with others, as I understand it....

Delta management and ALPA signed an agreement with another airline's pilot group for guaranteed Delta flying.

Delta pilots were taken out of the loop and the Delta pilot working agreement's scope section is no longer the sole legal controlling document ALPA has signed regarding the outsourcing of Delta flying. There now exists another legally binding agreement between Delta and ALPA that Delta pilots have no control over.

 

I don't quite agree. I say it IS still the only document that controls what and how much flying is permitted to be outsourced. Here is the DAL PWA:

SECTION 1

SCOPE

A. Recognition

1. In accordance with the certification issued by the National Mediation Board in Case No. R-7191, 36 NMB No. 21, January 22, 2009, the Company recognizes the Air Line Pilots Association, International, as the duly designated and authorized representative of the Flight Deck Crewmembers in the service of the Company for the purposes of the Railway Labor Act, as amended.

There is nothing in that sentence that specifically references the Delta MEC. In a weird sort of way it tightens scope from an "ALPA" perspective, but the process by which it all has come about might present a question mark within the organization.

The Pinnacle Flight Deck Crewmembers are still in the service of Pinnacle, NOT Delta.

Personally, I'm leaning more towards Sinkr8's point of view rather than it being an unmitigated disaster. I'm still confident that the EC or EB will take notice and make sure that the Policy Manual is being followed. We have a process, it was worked for a long time, it hasn't failed us yet.

 

John

Maybe I'm missing something. If you feel you're already too old to sit reserve as an FO at mainline, why would you even interview at DAL?

We have a lot of old dudes sitting in the right seat at DAL, me included, that have little hope of ever seeing the left seat again. If you're not prepared to sit as an FO on reserve, DAL probably isn't the place for you.

Good luck and hang in there.

Buzz

 

A question mark indeed.
If we let this genie out of the bottle it could have far reaching consequences. You say that it tightens ALPA scope "in a weird sort of way". Maybe. But doesn't it also allow management to pick which pilot group they want to bargain with? If Delta Air Lines can contractually obligate themselves to assign flying to Pinnacle Airlines pilots, what happens when Delta decides to sign a deal with some other pilot union for some other flying? Maybe Teamsters or an independent. Maybe some mainline jets. How does ALPA tell them they can't do that if we allow it in this case?

I am very suspicious of ALPA National. They have proven in the past that they do not always have the Delta pilots' best interests in mind.

Moak seems to view himself as some sort of transformational figure in the field of labor-management relations. He's gone "all-in" with his constructive engagement strategy. He thinks he is leading the way into some bright new future where management is no longer adversarial or hostile to labor and we all work together in harmony to achieve common goals.

I hope he knows what he is doing here. I think this is a dangerous game he's playing. Its a pretty big legal leap to allow a single carrier to make contracts with more than one pilot group and ALPA's lawyers do not exactly have a stellar record when it comes to unforeseen consequences.

 

This one breaks the mold because it allows another pilot group to come in and deal with Delta management. In this case, Pinnacle exercised an "exclusive" relationship with Delta management because the Delta pilots were not even advised such negotiations were taking place.

There were multiple violations of ALPA's Administrative Manual, Section 40. But, the biggest concern is the abrogation of our MEC's autonomy as it has been defined under our Constitution and Bylaws.

ALPA National is saying "there is nothing to see here, move on." Some D-ALPA Reps have taken the time to research and wrap their heads around this. They are very concerned. Some D-ALPA Reps call up the COC to see what they should say, and that's what they say. Perhaps a Special MEC meeting will provide an opportunity for Reps to share their perspectives and learn from one another.

The rubber meets the road at a couple of points. First, as a loyal ALPA member, I have to hope the Representation Department and Officers will take seriously their duty to uphold the Constitution and Bylaws and nip this thing in the bud, sooner rather than later. (so far, no joy) Then it becomes an issue for ALPA's Executive Council of MEC Chairmen to take up. They collectively can over ride a President.

My guess (and I don't know) is that ALPA's attorneys are going to be perceived as the trusted experts and their opinion will matter greatly. The problem is that ALPA's attorneys work for ALPA and advocate for their client. In this case, that means when a conflict may exist between national and a MEC, national wins (they sign the paychecks).

Once the mainline MECs figure out that national (may) let express carriers walk in and deal with mainline management in a way that preempts and limits the mainline MEC's bargaining, the mainline pilots will run out of ALPA like someone yelled "fire" in a crowded theater.

Don't take this as advocacy for decertification. No alternative is in a position to replace ALPA. ALPA does a irreplaceable service on Capitol Hill and has the potential to represent us most effectively to our management. The Pinnacle contract poses a problem which should be resolved in the normal course of union governance. A lot of good people work in our union and we have to trust they will do their job, even at the risk of being unpopular. Lee Moak has been effective and has mostly been good for our union. He may not see the harm in letting regional carriers engage in "left over bargaining" and I see no great harm in the results of the Pinnacle agreement. The great harm is the threat to MEC autonomy and the unilateral bargaining which appears contrary to our Constitution and Bylaws.

 

Thanks Bar, Lolwut for expanding.

Part of me thinks this is no different than negotiating with wholly-owned carriers in the past, i.e. with Comair, to strong-arm them. At that point, I don't think the DAL MEC was involved. The communication chain changes somehwat due to Pinnacle's reorganization, and Delta's rolw in it, but it's still Delta dealing through whatever channels to negotiate permitted flying. I assume this went through the same DCI puppet-master that coordinated every other deal on permitted flying.

However, I agree that it raises questions about constructive engagement, and the role of ALPA. I checked with my rep on this, and can't get conclusive answers, because he doesn't have conclusive answers either. Seems like it's certainly on the radar screen.

I'll keep following the discussion.

I'm much more interested in what discussions take place between DAL and Virgin Atlantic, and this might very well dovetail into that.