Who the crap cares about aircraft type? Are you that childish? Is this a NASCAR race where we're cheering for a chevy or a ford? Airbus, Boeing.... we fly them and get paid.

None of this changes the fact that we actively codeshare with these carriers. They are flying people that bought tickets from the company that employs us. I didn't like flying the 737, but you don't see me making statements that I'd never get caught dead flying it. This is not about an airplane type- this is about scope. We are rapidly parking 25% of our largest fleet type with no replacement on property (apparently the 333IGW will be the capacity replacement when it gets here via reading between the lines), while our codeshare partners expand their "premium" fleets.

You don't care about small end scope, and I get that since it is mostly self mitigating at this point in time (the pendulum will swing the other way). However, this is top end jobs at DL being whisked away actively. Korean Air believes they should be doing all the Pacific flying. You've heard RA say that at the meetings.

So... where do we go from here? You constantly harp on hopey changey stuff yet you have presented so few ideas of your own- just mostly insults to others. Let's hear it, t. What can we do with the dynamics of the last few days other than ride the wave?

Which party do you think is more pilot friendly?

Neither party is pilot friendly. We are not Labor, at least not the Labor the Dems favor. We are above median income, and tend to vote conservative as a group. They are interested in the Government Employees unions and the Service Employees Unions. So to say that the Ds are more "labor friendly" may be true but they ain't talking about us.

The Republicans (not RINOS) may not be labor friendly but they are for policies that foster growth and a robust economy. Since our jobs hinge on such an economy you can say that Conservative policies espoused by some Republicans is more pilot friendly than the stagnation culture of dependency established by the Dems. I submit into evidence the last 6 years.

Now if we could find a party or politician that would fight to repeal or remove us from the RLA? That would be pilot friendly.

And Buzz I'm with you. I don't contribute to the PAC because of the list of candidates they support. I remember seeing Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid at the top of the list lately. Not gonna do it. Wouldn't be prudent....

You should tell the KLM and AF guys about expanding their premium fleets. They did not get the word. The KLM guys are so misinformed they believe the company suddenly decided to park all their MD11's/747 combi's years ahead of schedule and below is a bit about AF. The last MD11 flight is this fall.

""Air France earlier this week announced 2,800 additional job cuts in 2014, which now will total nearly 8,000 positions eliminated once the Transform 2015 recovery program, that announced 5,100 job cuts in 2011, is fully implemented. The carrier has also deferred two A380 deliveries to 2016 or beyond, and announced that it will phase out the Boeing 747 fleet beginning in 2016, four years earlier than expected, for both passenger and freighter models. The 747-400s will be replaced by more efficient twin engine A350 and 777 models in the Air France fleet.""

I believe the above news has changed again and they plan on all the 747 being gone by 2016. Here is a link on the future of the 747. I hate to see them leave however Delta marketing is far from alone on parking the airframes.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/bu...o-the-747.html

We have all known for the last 3 years that our joint venture scope will be violated, and that the company has never had any intention of honoring it. ALPA has put out numerous publications showing that the company will probably violate it, but nothing can be done until the violation occurs. Now it is even more certain than before that this scope will get violated. What happens when it does?

Mea maxima culpa.

I offer my apologies, admit I was wrong, retract my earlier assertions, and hope to do better in the future.

It appears to me that Prater came to the conclusion that it would be impossible for ALPA to support the Senator who sponsored the "Airline Labor Dispute Act" in 2002. Here is the bill. If this passed, Our line of work would be right back where it was in 1932:

https://beta.congress.gov/bill/107th....1327%22%5D%7D

It might be useful to know how any other pilot would get around both the ethical obstacles and the contradictions. The executive policy decisions made since 2008 (tarmac delay rule, taxes, Abu Dhabi, FAR 117, Eximbank) demonstrate that it's never a good idea for a labor union with a presence on the Hill to get involved in presidential politics. Whatever the outcome, we end up alienating half of Congress and half of our PAC supporters. Lose-lose.

I believe we are on the right track with the pilot partisan strategy - it keeps our efforts focused on our issues, and neither party can take our support for granted.

Since the number of flights is about 2.5 flights a day they have lacked to be in compliance it almost certainly would have to be handled under the grievance process. What we ask for in return is the issue. I don't think there is a real way to figure out damages on a individual basis. I would like to see us ask for a raise equal to the lost salary and a penalty of say 3% on top of that for all pilots to insure future compliance by the company. Probably be about a 3.25% raise.
I would also like to see the arbitrator attach a higher penalty via a additional raise if they do not come into compliance in the next 36 month cycle.
Note: not sure if the above is within the arbitration rules but I hope so.

Are you worse off now than you were six years ago?

I recently flew with a captain (great guy) who excused DALPA for this because "What can you do to make them sign something they don't want to sign?" I'll give DALPA this: they have done an awesome job of convincing a good number in our group that they are not to be held responsible for anything.

I like the idea of staffing for the flying whether or not the flights are flown. That fixes the problem going forward. The past infractions can be monetized since you can't retroactively staff.

I think this is achievable in the negotiation/grievance process. Carl mentioned ending the JV but I doubt an arbitrator would force the company to stop commerce. The punishment doesn't fit the crime and it doesn't even really help Delta pilots.