Several questions there. Since Carl did such a poor job answering, let me help him out.

The RLA and our PWA give us the right to perform all Delta Company flying. We permit Company flying to be done by other pilots and permit codeshare on other air carriers.

It is impractical (for reasons of legality, even if economics are ignored) for Delta to fly every Delta passenger from every point across our network. Having a broad, convenient, international and domestic network improves marginal revenue ... we probably are not a sustainable business without it.

ALPA's task is extremely complex. While Delta pilots have a contractual right to all Delta flying, the definition of "Delta flying" is anything but simple. The Delta MEC has led, and continues to expand it's lead, over the rest of the profession when it comes to strategically planning, negotiating and implementing labor protective provisions.

Much of the progress we have made as a Company, a pilot group, and as leaders of our Association has been the result of a unique corporate culture which allows us to work together. When you consider what has happened elsewhere: American struggled with scope for 15 years just to have a Judge impose a several year old version of Delta's language and United's agreement also mirrors ours.

Delta being able to maintain a first mover advantage benefits the Delta pilots. At the same time, we must work damn hard to ensure Delta pilots maintain their right to perform Delta flying; defining that flying broadly so that the Delta pilots remain relevant.

An expedited arbitration enforceable through Federal District Court is not an "enforcement mechanism" ?

I agree with what you are saying however the numbers do not back up your statement. AF/KLM did not grow at our expense. I have posted the charts here. The one chart posted showing a drop from just over 50% to 46.5 was when Alitalia was added. Relative to AF/KLM we have been in a very narrow band with no substantial change on either side. Please give SM a call at the union. He keeps track of all the numbers and is very sharp.
What the company failed to do was increase the flying back up to the required minimum of 48.5% after adding Alitalia. They cwill fall about 1% short.

A federal judge is going to make Delta adhere to its contractual obligations?

It would be if we had such a thing.

But I am talking about a contractually specified penalty for non-compliance.

Ultimately, yes; arbitration board decisions under the NMB are enforced by the Federal District Courts.

Expedited Arbitration is contractually specified in the instance you are referring to.

A contractually specified penalty is popular, but is it the best way forward? An arbitration award can scale with the degree of the violation.

In contrast if we were to try to negotiate a severe penalty for any degree of noncompliance, no matter how small, the Company would not agree. Of course anything can be bought, but is that where you would want negotiators using their capital, or would you prefer the current remedy which is scalable?

I have served as a panelist in three forums over the years. While never sitting on a labor case, my experience in inter-company dispute resolution always had very straightforward outcomes.

----

This is not to say I know how ALPA will resolve the AF/KLM/AZ grievance. There are much better experts on our MEC who deal with this stuff. I am just an observer in the bleachers.

SD's latest letter said we would have more than $4.5 billion in pre tax profits. Anyone want to hazard a guess at what the PS on that will be?

Quick question. I was just assigned a trip with a 9.20 rest with a DHD following, does anyone know if this adheres to the contract? I'm looking but haven't found anything yet.....

I don't think we have any work rules anymore. We just go by the FAR's these days.