Superpilot92

There is scope language that prevents any regional from replacing the DC9s once the cap is met on the mainline fleet. Also there are only 18 unaccounted for regional aircraft that can be purchased until mainline starts getting more aircraft. Not replacement jets net growth aircraft. I see alot of DAL guys conveniently forgetting about scope clause. I know its tough for DAL guys to understand scope language since they have a lack there of. Bottom line is Compass cant just replace all the flying the DC9s do.

Scoop

Super,

If you guys have it so good why does your MEC keep trying to restart the talks? After all you guys have more "Premium Widebody" flying anyway. Since all you guys think DAL is on deaths bed just spare us your benevolence, and let the deal die.

sully606

Super,

Have you read Delta's scope language? You're discription of NWA's scope sounds similar to DAL's. DAL's is nothing to write home about but the struture has limits on RJs. I don't have the language in front of me but I believe that DAL is allowed 30 "unaccounted" and then three RJs allowed for every mainline added based on a floor set last year. There is also a max limit of RJs. We also have payrates for EMB190/195s and Canadair 900s.

I understand you have a mainline floor set on 1 May 08. Is NWA parking any of the DC-9s before then?

nwaf16dude

Our narrowbody floor gets set on the 3rd of April. That being said, there are enough loopholes for the company to drive through that the floor is essentially meaningless in my opinion. I don't think either pilot group has scope worth bragging about, especially compared to what we had pre-bankruptcy.

Bucking Bar

Superpilot:

You assume NWA and DAL scope language continues as written, but it can't. The merged airline would violate both PWAs. The contradictory language has to be resolved.

Concomitant to our deal, Comair is probably in play with another flying award.

Unconfirmed rumors are that the merger is being re-analyzed on the assumption that the DC9's are not in the fleet.

Superpilot92

They are reengaging mainly because they know its going to happen anyway, even against DALALPAs popular belief. The whole deal stinks and bottom line is we either get along or we dont. I prefer if this thing goes down i dont have to hear about it for the rest of my career. Last i checked we were both ALPA so hopefully we work together and actually act like a union.

acl65pilot

If the DC-9's go away that is about 700 less pilots that are needed. Kind of convenient, don't ya think

newKnow

It doesn't take much to get you guys ramblin' away on an unsubstantiated rumor, does it?


Did you hear the one about DC-9 pilots going to the top of the combined list with the first three years off at full pay so they can SLOWLY train for the B-797 in Hawaii? (Since you guys believe everything you hear I guess I have to say, it's just a joke)

I'm sure that will surface simewhere else though as what our "one man cowboy merger committe" wanted because he wanted to go to arbitration so his record coud go to 0 for 27 which is his favorite number....


Apparently, one of the biggest drawbacks to putting new hires in widebodies is that it gives you guys way too much time on your hands. Instead of daydreaming and letting your minds run rampant while looking out the window at that big blue ocean, ask the Captain if you can read a book.

sailingfun

Delta has scope protection on par with what NWA has. Neither airline has very good scope overall. The real question is what scope protection was agreed to in the combined working agreement. That is all that will matter going forward. The new work rules will generate 300 to 500 additional pilot jobs on the NWA side so that would offset job loss from the DC-9's to a certain amount.

Herkflyr

Here is where DAL guys disagree. You talk about your retirement numbers as if it is pretty much assured that your guys will retire at 60. I agree that under your current compensation and retirement structure that that is the case. But if we were to merge with something close to what we originally agreed upon, I think that almost all the NWA captains would stay. Why?

- BIG pay raises.
- Significant equity payout

AND

- 14% B fund contributions (which would be based on the much higher pay rates).

Take your typical "Green book" captain stuck on the A320 who now sees the possibility of a 777 captain seat, coupled with said pay increases and significant B fund contributions, and staying to 65 seems like an easy decision. So now we (DAL) see the possibility of the NWA claim of "attrition" being used to justify a more DAL-unfriendly SLI not even coming true anyway.

Of course absent a crystal ball it is very difficult to really make an accurate prediction. But I will bet that if we had one, and if we were to merge with the contractual improvements noted, that you would see most NWA guys stay to 65. I think I would if I were one of them.