If the mediator did indeed do as you claimed, then why do the proposed pay rates, work rules, and code share protections fall short of DAL pilots contract? And what garbage are you spewing about DC9 size aircraft being given to express? I haven't seen a DC9-10 or equivalent size being flown by UAL or CAL for well over 15 years. And if you're referring to the CRJ900/EMB175, you really have no argument there. You see the 86,000 lbs 76 seat max has been in place for 3 contracts now. It hasn't changed, yet we keep receiving raises. On this last TA DAL management wanted an 82 seat limit, & our negotiating committee said "Yes, but they'll be flown at mainline". Management decided to stay at 76 seats.

Oh, and we are also still flying DC9-50s. And next year we will begin to fly B717's which will have even less seats then the DC9-50 & will result in MORE mainline flying and LESS outsourced jobs. Once you're able to grasp that, maybe you'll start to understand how DAL pilots are creating more mainline jobs in the long run.

It's nice how you like to blame all scope issues on DAL. You never seem to acknowledge the fact that Us Air has outsourced 86 seat scope for years now. Maybe we should blame UAL for crappy pay & pathetic work rules. After all, you've failed to improve them for how long? Been working under BK wages for how long? Good luck on shooting it down & recapturing that scope. I look forward to you proving many of us wrong.

 

I'll say it one more time. Any contract that allows purchase of more brand new 76 seat jets is a concession. American, United, Delta, anyone.

Who cares if they park old 50 seaters, who cares about ratios. If we are allowing more large RJs to be purchased, then they should be flown at mainline.

Any new jets bought now will be flown at outsourced rates for decades. Why would we let more cats out of the bag?

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Let's not have short term memory loss on regarding the stagnation and furloughs that these outsourced large RJs have cost EVERYONE.

 

How? Present facts please. The most recent DAL contract resulted in the guaranteed reduction of over 1300 RJ jobs, 88 B717's coming to mainline. At the very least, the transfer of more flying back to mainline was accelerated.

You figure out how to do that, & let us all know. On the latest DAL TA, management wanted 82 seat RJs. Our NC said sure, but they'll be flown at mainline. They quickly redacted that request. They wouldn't budge on recapturing flying.

Decades? 50 seaters haven't been flown for decades yet, & they're already being parked.

I think the 50 seaters had a greater effect then the large RJs. The 50 seaters generally aren't limited, while the 70/76 seaters are.

 

You are just way more of a man than I will ever be I guess.

 

Really? You are so far out in left field you need a telescope to see home plate. But don't let that get in the way of a good rant. Oh and next time use all caps so we can all know what you are saying.

 

Our pay rates actually surpass DAL's by year 3.

Work rules were tough since CAL's were so bad to begin with. We are actually fighting a war on several fronts...one being with management and another with CAL ALPA and their illustrious leader.

I guess I just don't understand why we have to beg for the privilege of flying our own passengers.

When I refer to "DC-9" size airplanes, that's right on the mark. Look at the gross weights of early DC-9's.

 

So if we get the blame for Scope, does that mean we also get the credit for payrates?

Scoop

 

Now you're getting it...we all affect each others contracts. Just like back in 2000 when we raised the bar for the entire industry.

However.....$400 per hour is no good without a job.

Scope is my #1 concern, and those 5 DAL CRJ-900's parked at ORD some nights make me sick. Bill Lumberg swore they would only operate into small markets like Abilene.

Boy was he wrong.

 

BEWARE: Rj's at 76 seats. However..........word is management is buying the 90ish seat version, and removing some seats.

wanna bet they will come to us, either voluntarilly or behind some veil and start their own plan for 90 something seat RJ flying....

90 seats for 900 miles.

DUDE////////// It was never about the 76 seat RJ............It'a always been about the 90 class seat jet. Beware If we let them buy the big RJ's they will eventually reconfigure them and take 90 pax up to 900 miles.

The language is not tight enough. Too much risk for main line pilots.

 

It matters not who gets the blame. there is plenty to go around.

Blame it on the rain or milli vanilli if you like.

Right now, the buck stops with us. Blame it on us if we goof this up.

Won't matter who gets proved wrong when we don't move up the ladder due to RJ's taking over ALL domestic flying over the next 10 years at legacy carriers. As soon as they can send an RJ to London they'll go after the long haul stuff too.

Every 10 years, this career goes backwards 30 years in terms of career expectations................

What you gonna do, barbeque, or mildew?

If you are on the bottom one third of either the CAL or UAL seniority lists, this scope language should get your attention, because that's where you'll be for the next 10 years.

Good Luck.