ASA pay scales

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
Caveman: Thanks - you write better than I do and are more succinct - help out any time you like!


IFF: I'm confused - you write:
The base goal is still the same. I don't want to be part of such an effort
You also write:
While I agree with your ultimate goals, a lawsuit isn't the answer. We need to scope non wholly owned airlines out and then work with DALPA for one list with a staple.
Don't you understand that ALPA will not allow the ASA MEC to negotiate with Delta? The ASA MEC has already been told that ASA management can not control Delta's allocation of Connection flying.

Have you ever asked a member of your LEC, or MEC, to engage in negotiations with Delta's MEC? What was the response they gave you?

Several of us did prepare and propose three resolutions at the last LEC meeting asking our representatives to engage in communications with DALPA if they were negotiating revised scope, or furlough protection using our jets - where you there? If you were there, you heard Bob Arnold say that they would not hold a vote on these resolutions and that approaching Delta, or the Delta MEC, over scope relief would "pi$$ off ALPA national" which is something we did not want to do just before asking for money to negotiate our next contract.

We have asked for DALPA's help. Their MEC Chairman, Will Burguey told Bob Arnold that "if (Delta) were to staple the ASA pilots, where would the military pilots go? You could not expect them to fly a Brazillia." Long story short is that DALPA does not care about ASA pilots and it is not their job to care about us. They are only interested in ASA when it threatens their narrow body domestic flying.

Litigation is my last choice - I do not like it either. However, there is just no other way to force both sides to the negotiation table.

If you know a better way, tell your MEC representatives to do it! Then kindly post your activities on the board and we will have something to talk about.

However, if you are doing nothing to protect your job except hoping for the generosity of ALPA and DALPA to help you, oh nevermind, it is redundant.

Who created scope? Who allowed domestic codeshare to begin in the first place? DALPA did - and you are waiting for them to fix this mess... come on IFF - get real.
 
Last edited:

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
FL000:

Thanks for your reasoned reply. Like you, I lived in a cubie, then lived in an office - 12 to 16 hours a day. Like you, this gave me a real appreciation for the job we do now, flying Delta's passengers on CRJ's. It is a great life.

That is the reason why I am so determined to protect my job and career expectations.

You write:
So to get DALPA's support you:

a) negotiate, explaining the merits of your case

b) sue 'em
That is exactly what we did. The PID presentation explained the merits of onelist to the ALPA Board of Directors. At this meeting the Chairman of the Delta MEC argued against onelist.

The RJDC again tried negotiating - to no avail.

Plan (b) is in progress and all of a sudden ALPA is in a mood to negotiate. They have explained that coordination with the Delta MEC will be required.

I hope for the best for all pilots in the employ of Delta Airlines, at least we are talking.
 

ifly4food

ifly4food.com
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
956
Total Time
To Muc
Prof,
I am being very real. And I'm sorry if you're confused because I won't agree with you.

What confuses me is that you keep saying "ALPA won't allow us to negotiate with Delta". Um, isn't that exactly what we're doing starting in September? Yes, technically we negotiate with ASA, but ASA is Delta is ASA. Skip gets his orders from the top. There is no reason whatsoever we can't get our own scope clause (similiar to the one DALPA got) limiting connection flying to wholly owned carriers.

I'm not waiting for DALPA to fix anything. I'm not waiting for a lawsuit to work itself through either. I'm saying we should fix our own mess and then once our ducks are in a row, ask DALPA for a staple. Even Flying Sig could agree with that.
As FL000 says, if the RJDC wins, we WILL be the black sheep of the industry. We will be right down there with scabs. It isn't the way to go.
I will support RJDC when they drop the lawsuit and pursue the goale we have discussed in a diplomatic manner.

In closing, we really have bigger fish to fry than to argue about the merits of the RJDC. We need to be focusing on our upcoming negotiations and pulling together- not drawing apart as the RJDC is clearly causing us to do. We are already going into negotiations in a extremely weak position. Unity is all we have. We need to focus and speak with one voice when it's time to play hardball.

Prof, I ask you this... whose team are you gonna be on?
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
IFF, I love debating you. Ok here we go:

You write:
What confuses me is that you keep saying "ALPA won't allow us to negotiate with Delta".
There was a letter on the ALPA board from Cohen, Weiss and Simon to Bob Arnold. This letter explained that the ASA MEC could only negotiate with ASA management. It further explained that in the union's view ASA was not Delta. Bob Arnold took the letter down, but you can probably still get a copy from our MEC's offices 404-763-4935.

Since ALPA is the sole bargaining agent, we can not go outside ALPA national's directives and negotiate with Delta. Our MEC does not have that authority.

Since Delta does not want ASA pilots to interfere with their domestic flying, they gladly point to ALPA's letter and tell us "we can not talk to you."

Simply - it is impossible for the ASA MEC to scope anything done by the parent company because we can only negotiate with the subsidiary.

You write:
We are already going into negotiations in a extremely weak position.
And why is that? Because we have five groups of pilots performing Delta domestic flying.

You write:
Unity is all we have. We need to focus and speak with one voice when it's time to play hardball. Prof, I ask you this... whose team are you gonna be on?
I am going to be on the side who has the ball and which is moving it down the field. Justice has never been won by the timid.

ALPA is treating the ASA MEC with more respect that they ever have because they know there may be legal ramifications if they fail to represent us.

When you read Flying the Line I and II, you realize that ALPA has always been in a weak position when it allowed alter ego airlines to compete for the same flying. E.L. Cord did this at American, Lorenzo at Continental and now you and I are feeling the effects going into this contract.

ALPA may need a "bad guy" to force them into doing the right thing. At the time, Martin Luther King was thought to be a troublemaker - just like anyone else that rocks the boat in the pursuit of what is right.

I'm no Martin Luther King, but I am willing to fight for what I believe in. So what have you done? I'd like to know if you have talked to any of your representatives, and what reply you got.
 

ifly4food

ifly4food.com
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
956
Total Time
To Muc
You keep baiting me by inviting me to discuss this with our MEC reps. I have to be honest... I haven't. Between flying naps, commuting from waaay up north and spending time with my family, I just haven't gotten there yet.
Your explanation of why we can't negotiate our own version of scope seems plausible. I guess I'll just have to go ask Mike or someone else if it really works out that way. For now I guess I'll have to take your word for it.
It's clear that we agree that we are very weak because of the alter ego threat. The new CEO of DCI has now openly stated that he would like to see DCI flying go to the "lowest cost provider" and that he isn't opposed to bringing in new companies to fly Delta passengers.
I would like to know what your solution to this problem is if we can't simply scope them out. Are you really saying that our only hope of settling our contract and protecting our flying is to sue ALPA?
You mention Bob Arnold a lot. I get the impression that you think we would could use different leadership. You have to understand that he's walking a thin line. Just like the Comair MEC, they have to play nice with the RJDC thing. They do, after all, work for ALPA. I'm not sure what you expect from him. However, if the MEC got a unified response from us, the pilots of ASA, they would have no choice but to take on national and get permission to negotiate scope with ASA and Delta. As it is, why stick your neck out if it isn't necessary.
While we divide ourselves into factions, the MEC will go without guidance, and thus take the easy road... to not fight ALPA national. With unity, we can force them to do what's right even if it's not easy. The RJDC isn't the answer to this. Whether it's agenda has changed or not, the stigma is still there. It will never garner the support needed at ASA to carry our intentions to those who can do something about it.

You say you will be on the side that has the ball, and I agree that justice is never won by the timid. However, moving the ball never lasts without a solid game strategy and a strong team to support the front line. Even Martin Luther King knew that he would go nowhere if he didn't have support. He knew how to fight when necessary, but apease when required.
Does the RJDC?
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
IFF: Thanks for your reply.

Either Bob Arnold, or Mike White is a good source on the scope issue. Again, reading the letter for yourself is the best information. (I wish it was still on the MEC site)

Candidly I like Bob Arnold a lot. He is a smart politician and does a good job of advocating pilot issues to ASA management.

However, we provided written guidance to our LEC in the form of resolutions proposed at the last LEC meeting. These resolutions were supported by a majority of pilots present, plus many pilots had provided proxies so their vote could be counted in absentia.

Bob Arnold blocked the vote from taking place. Now when our representative refuses to represent the pilots, I believe it is serious. Like you said, Bob is trying to place nice with ALPA national right now.

You write:
I would like to know what your solution to this problem is if we can't simply scope them out. Are you really saying that our only hope of settling our contract and protecting our flying is to sue ALPA?
The best solution is onelist - all Delta flying by Delta pilots. Here is how we get there:
(1) We have to negotiate with ALPA & DALPA.
(2) ALPA and DALPA have refused to even let us participate in the process - so we have to bring them to the table by whatever means necessary - that unfortunately means - sue them.
(3) ALPA and DALPA have to abandon scope that separates the pilot groups.
(4) Once scope is gone ALPA & DALPA will want "all pilots performing Delta flying" on one list so that they can control "Delta flying."

Of course there are also other ways to get there. Since ALPA refused onelist, the RJDC asked for revisions in the Constitution and Bylaws which would provide for a system of checks and balances - like the Senate balances the power of Congress and the Supreme Court balances the President's power. The intent of these revisions to the CB&L would be to give "small jet" pilots a voice in the contracts that control our wages and working conditions. (ALPA said they could not do that - but that is another story)

ALPA is run by pure majority rule. Repeatedly the union has got into trouble when they took unfair advantage of minority member groups. ALPA has been to the Courthouse and lost many times. Since there are no checks and balances the majority within ALPA these sorts of problems are not that unusual.

ALPA does not want to give the power of representation to minority pilot groups. They would rather onelist so they can control us under a single MEC, which is fine with me.

What we have to watch out for when we seek alternatives to onelist is the kind of problems the Continental Express pilots have. ALPA gave them one MEC under two lists. As you can imagine the Express pilots get no representation at all. They are now wishing that they had a separate MEC.

So onelist is the best answer to fix whipsaw while protecting the Delta pilots as well as those pilots at Connection.

The Delta pilots could control all Delta flying by controlling the pilots who fly Delta's aircraft. The smart move is to bring these pilots together - like the founding fathers of our nation brought together the 13 colonies to form the United States.

If the RJDC makes ALPA's stupid move of predatory scope more painful than the good move of unity within our union, then the RJDC has served a useful purpose.
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
IFF: Thanks for your reply.

Either Bob Arnold, or Mike White is a good source on the scope issue. Again, reading the letter for yourself is the best information. (I wish it was still on the MEC site)

Candidly I like Bob Arnold a lot. He is a smart politician and does a good job of advocating pilot issues to ASA management.

However, we provided written guidance to our LEC in the form of resolutions proposed at the last LEC meeting. These resolutions were supported by a majority of pilots present, plus many pilots had provided proxies so their vote could be counted in absentia.

Bob Arnold blocked the vote from taking place. Now when our representative refuses to represent the pilots, I believe it is serious. Like you said, Bob is trying to place nice with ALPA national right now.

You write:
I would like to know what your solution to this problem is if we can't simply scope them out. Are you really saying that our only hope of settling our contract and protecting our flying is to sue ALPA?
The best solution is onelist - all Delta flying by Delta pilots. Here is how we get there:
(1) We have to negotiate with ALPA & DALPA.
(2) ALPA and DALPA have refused to even let us participate in the process - so we have to bring them to the table by whatever means necessary - that unfortunately means - sue them.
(3) ALPA and DALPA have to abandon scope that separates the pilot groups.
(4) Once scope is gone ALPA & DALPA will want "all pilots performing Delta flying" on one list so that they can control "Delta flying."

Of course there are also other ways to get there. Since ALPA refused onelist, the RJDC asked for revisions in the Constitution and Bylaws which would provide for a system of checks and balances - like the Senate balances the power of Congress and the Supreme Court balances the President's power. The intent of these revisions to the CB&L would be to give "small jet" pilots a voice in the contracts that control our wages and working conditions. (ALPA said they could not do that - but that is another story)

ALPA is run by pure majority rule. Repeatedly the union has got into trouble when they took unfair advantage of minority member groups. ALPA has been to the Courthouse and lost many times. Since there are no checks and balances the majority within ALPA these sorts of problems are not that unusual.

ALPA does not want to give the power of representation to minority pilot groups. They would rather onelist so they can control us under a single MEC, which is fine with me.

What we have to watch out for when we seek alternatives to onelist is the kind of problems the Continental Express pilots have. ALPA gave them one MEC under two lists. As you can imagine the Express pilots get no representation at all. They are now wishing that they had a separate MEC.

So onelist is the best answer to fix whipsaw while protecting the Delta pilots as well as those pilots at Connection.

The Delta pilots could control all Delta flying by controlling the pilots who fly Delta's aircraft. The smart move is to bring these pilots together - like the founding fathers of our nation brought together the 13 colonies to form the United States.

If the RJDC makes ALPA's stupid move of predatory scope more painful than the good move of unity within our union, then the RJDC has served a useful purpose.

P.S. I tried to send you a message on your flica question - but your mailbox is full. Regards!
 

ifly4food

ifly4food.com
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
956
Total Time
To Muc
~~~^~~~ said:
Here is how we get there:
(1) We have to negotiate with ALPA & DALPA.
But how? Can you blame them for not wanting to negotiate while we're suing them?


(2) ALPA and DALPA have refused to even let us participate in the process - so we have to bring them to the table by whatever means necessary - that unfortunately means - sue them.
Maybe they would be more willing now that things have changed in the industry... if we weren't suing them.

(3) ALPA and DALPA have to abandon scope that separates the pilot groups.
Or they have to let us form our own version of predatory scope to protect our flying. Instead of forcing them, let's give them an offer they can't refuse. End alter ego, and keep non-union Skywest out.

(4) Once scope is gone ALPA & DALPA will want "all pilots performing Delta flying" on one list so that they can control "Delta flying."
You don't think Delta mgt. will seize that opportunity once scope is gone to further hose the Delta pilots? Agreed that onelist is the solution, but we need to do it in a way that makes DALPA want it. And I'm assuming once the above happens, ASA and Comair will no longer exist so that we can negotiate directly with Delta, i.e. we will be Delta pilots?

The Delta pilots could control all Delta flying by controlling the pilots who fly Delta's aircraft. The smart move is to bring these pilots together - like the founding fathers of our nation brought together the 13 colonies to form the United States.
They have no motive to bring us together right now. We need to give them a reason to do so. As far as controlling us, I think they've succeeded there, don't you?

If the RJDC makes ALPA's stupid move of predatory scope more painful than the good move of unity within our union, then the RJDC has served a useful purpose.
But it's only further divided the union. And I don't think it's caused nearly as much pain as some think it has. I would rate is like a bee sting to ALPA... annoying, slightly painful, but hardly life threatening.
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
DALPA did not love us before we sued, they will not love us if we dismiss the lawsuit.

The harm ALPA caused by not representing the ASA pilots was a choice they made. There is no reason why they would choose differently now that there is even more pressure on the union to protect the highly paid pilot's jobs first.

I thank God that the Comair plaintiffs got that suit in before September 11th.

Again, any time ALPA wants the lawsuit to go away they can pick up the phone, invite our representatives to participate in the re-negotiations that are going on at Delta right now and allow us the opportunity to vote on the contract which affects our career and job opportunities.

ALPA has not been put in a box. Quite to the contrary - they could file a single carrier petitiion, a policy implementation date for a merger, or revise scope.

And yes, a 100 million demand with 600 million in actual damages is serious to a union with about 70 million in assetts.
 

FlyingSig

Double Breasted _ _ _
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Posts
560
Total Time
7000+
Also, everything depends on growth. ASA is not currently growing, but there is much debate on this board on what the future holds.


I was re-reading some posts and this statement kinda jumped out at me....

The fact that you are basing your budget on something that has not materialized seems to me more like poor financial planning instead of an actual "pay scale". Delta management tried that arguement during the last set of negotiations. They said that we should accept their pay scales because they are going to order a whole bunch of airplanes and we'd all be MD88 Captains in 4 years..... seems like you're buying off pretty good on a management trick.

When you are hired by an airline you know what the published first officer rates are. Once you make captain or transition to larger equipment they too have a published pay scale and when you're actually in the seat you can adjust your personal budget accordingly.

If the yes/no decision to go work for a company is based on making Captain in xx amount of time you picked the wrong industry.

Ok...back to reading now....
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
Sig:

You are correct, Sir. I based my immediate career expectations on the firm orders for aircraft and the published growth rate that Delta management handed me when I interviewed. I've still got the paperwork.

Unlike most ASA pilots, I left a job that paid me quite well. If I had known scope were coming, I would have selected another airline, or simply remained where I was formerly employed.

Correct, there is a lot of uncertainty in this business - but what happened at ASA was not due to any market upheval. What happened to growth at ASA is a direct result of ALPA's actions.

Would you like a CRJ900 CA slot? If ALPA would work in our best interests maybe we could take advantage of the fact that Delta overlaps 37% of US Air's route structure. The 900 looks alot like a MD90 :p
 
Last edited:

FlyingSig

Double Breasted _ _ _
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Posts
560
Total Time
7000+
Have you privately e-mailed Flying Sig to see if he will write you a letter of recommendation?
No but would one of you guys consider writing one for me? I'm already typed in the SkySlug.....

And yes, a 100 million demand with 600 million in actual damages is serious to a union with about 70 million in assetts.
Let's say for second that RJDC won its lawsuit. You guys are all on-paper rich now (God bless America). First off, I don't suppose ALPA would appeal would they? That's probaly a given for both sides...

Next... An award that large would bankrupt ALPA. You guys would singlehandedly be responsible for killing the largest advocate for aviation safety in the world.

Delta pilots would more than likely form their own union and with a bankrupted union I'm sure it wouldn't take long to get certified. While this is happening our contract would, per RLA, remain status quo. I'm also sure it wouldn't be very hard to make a photocopy of the contract and get the company to sign off on the exact same agreement they have already agreed to.

So where does that put you? Well, you're a millionare now, so you don't really care about the tens of thousands of pilots you've harmed (not to mention caused financial harm to.... pilots at small carriers like TSA who make less than you do who would also have to pay into assesments to pay you off).


OR

ALPA settles and tells DALPA they have to renegotiate the scope section. DALPA files with the NMB to dump ALPA and again, the contract is status quo. Think it would be hard to get an independent union on property with no scope hanging over our heads?

OR

Delta Air Lines simply tells ALPA, "a contract is a contract"... tough luck.


... but .... you're still not a Delta pilot doing that Delta flying that "prompted you to sue" in the first place. So is this a victory?


As you can imagine the Express pilots get no representation at all. They are now wishing that they had a separate MEC.
Just curious where you got this idea? CoEx has 6 votes (IAH, EWR, & CLE) while mainline has 8 (add GUM). CoEx has 2000 pilots, Mainline has 5000. The Sec/Tres on the MEC is former CoEx, the Chairman got elected DUE to CoEx votes.... seems like more than adequate representation to me.

Did you work for the media in a past life? You're awlfully good at typing your opinion and playing it off as fact.....

This letter explained that the ASA MEC could only negotiate with ASA management. It further explained that in the union's view ASA was not Delta.
Again that media background shines through with that play on words...so lets decipher: (disclaimer: I never read "the letter")

The ASA MEC is getting ready to negotiate a new contract. They will do so with ASA management. Because ASA management has no money, they are the agent to DCI....but DCI has no money either, as they are the agent to Delta Air Lines, Inc. Thus, when you gain any ground in the negotiating process you are in turn, actually negotiating with Delta. Nobody has ever stopped you from doing so.

Their MEC Chairman, Will Burguey told Bob Arnold that "if (Delta) were to staple the ASA pilots, where would the military pilots go? You could not expect them to fly a Brazillia."
You keep saying this, and before I asked you to point out where you got this other than crew room rumor. You have now put those words in quotes so could you please point me to the written documents that say this? I know...they don't exist. Again, seems to me to be more of your small airplane/real job complex that comes out every now and then.

That is the reason why I am so determined to protect my job and career expectations.
If you had been hired in the late 80s early 90s at ASA what would your career expectations be? How about if you were hired today (knowing the scope clause was already in effect)? Career expectations rise and fall with the economy.

Even if you got on at the hight of the late 90s boom, just what were your expectations taking a job at ASA? I curious if they were realistic?


If it will make you feel better, and give me some credibility in your eyes, I will start a whole thread dedicated to Delta pilot jokes. Something tells me that a guy like FlyingSig would laugh and not take it personally. Would that help???
Bring it on... ;) :)
 

FlyingSig

Double Breasted _ _ _
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Posts
560
Total Time
7000+
I based my immediate career expectations on the firm orders for aircraft and the published growth rate that Delta management handed me when I interviewed. I've still got the paperwork.
When I got hired at CoEx, they were to be an all jet fleet by 2002. It was right there on the paperwork. Things change. Delta had 150 firm orders for MD-90's but along came the Gulf War... Things change. (But I never felt the need to sue anyone)

Unlike most ASA pilots, I left a job that paid me quite well.
I did the same thing when I quit CoEx and started over at DAL... But I knew what the published pay scales (on C'96) and based on being in the lowest position for a long time it was still acceptable to me.... so what's your point. You make a career decision. Good for you.

If I had known scope were coming, I would have selected another airline, or simply remained where I was formerly employed.
From what I have gathered on this board you are not yet a captain? Based on ASA upgrade times over the past few years I take it you have probally been over there 2-3 years? If you didn't know about scope then you were living under a rock. But that sure does sound like a good answer for the plaintiff in a lawsuit.

Correct, there is a lot of uncertainty in this business - but what happened at ASA was not due to any market upheval.
I disagree.
ASA was bought by a large corporation that was also in the business of owning and working with other airlines of similar size. ASA's block hours are now distributed by this corporation thoughout its network. This corporation decides where ASA flys, how many airplanes they get, and even where the pilot bases will be. ALPA doesn't get a say in this. It is done as the market dictates. Sounds like market upheval to me (esp.. the SkyWest in DFW part...if that's not market upheval what is?)
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
I disagree.
ASA was bought by a large corporation that was also in the business of owning and working with other airlines of similar size. ASA's block hours are now distributed by this corporation thoughout its network. This corporation decides where ASA flys, how many airplanes they get, and even where the pilot bases will be. ALPA doesn't get a say in this.
I call Bull-effluvia! ALPA negotiated the scope restriction. This is not market driven, it is an arbitrary cap set by ALPA's negotiating team.

Since this contract with my employer clearly affects my pay and working conditions I had the right to vote on it under ALPA's Constitution and Bylaws. ALPA denied me that vote, or any representation in the negotiations.

There was no block hour restriction when I hired in. When I hired in Delta's scope of ASA was 105 seats and less with no limits on jets 70 seats and less.

The Delta pilots had decided they did not want to fly small jets (they still don't) so they used the creation of alter ego airlines as a give away to obtain higher pay rates and better working conditions for the big jet pilots.

When the Delta pilots abandoned flying of aircraft which they felt were undesireable, ASA grew into that market. Now all of a sudden they want to reclaim what they negotiated away for higher wages years ago. DALPA sold flying of small jets for money - taking by force equates to theft!

Also - the large corporation that bought us thoroughly integrated our operations. The only differences that exist are there for the purposes of using one labor group to undermine and fight against the other labor groups.

At Delta you have Folker 27 pilots from Northeast and ATR pilots from Ransome (Pan Am Express) who were bought and merged into the Delta seniority list. Fifteen years ago DALPA would have insisted that the Comair and ASA pilots be stapled because ALPA had the memory of Continental and United's alter ego labor forces that broke the union apart.
This corporation decides where ASA flys, how many airplanes they get,
Yes and Delta decided to place the largest RJ order in history for almost 500 aircraft - ALPA realized that before long the regional pilots at COEX, ASA, and Comair would soon outnumber the mainline guys and ALPA declared war on RJ pilots. Scope is intended to be RJ pilot birth control and it has been very effective at limiting the growth in the numbers of RJ pilots.
 
Last edited:

FlyingSig

Double Breasted _ _ _
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Posts
560
Total Time
7000+
I knew you couldn't get through a whole post without using the words alter ego ;)

Delta decided to place the largest RJ order in history for almost 500 aircraft
Again, if that's the "growth" what you based your decision to come to ASA on, then you didn't really do your homework on the aviation indusy. Let's look at some facts though...

Go to Delta.com and look at the annual report.

At the end of 2000, Delta owned 23 CRJ's and Leased 124 airplanes.

At the same time, they had (This includes the deliveries taken in 2001) 144 firm orders for CRJ's (100/200/700). That's a total of 268 airplanes.

remember, you said "I based my immediate career expectations on the firm orders for aircraft and the published growth rate that Delta management handed me when I interviewed."

So you based your decision to come to ASA based on a DCI fleet of 268 aiplanes of which Delta management would decide how many would actually go to ASA.

Delta still has the option to purchase/lease and additional 396 airplanes

So that means, while you made you're decision based on 268 airplanes, the possibility still exists that DCI will more than double in size by 2005. And this is harmful to your career? Bull-effluvia ;)

Oh, you say you won't be able to get those options because of alter ego preditory scope (sorry, I had to use alter ego for your benifit)? Have you read the DALPA contract? Probally not... but.

You can still get every single one of those options. The only restriction Delta has is they have to increase mainline block hours as well. They can order 5000 more CRJ's and give ASA 30 million more block hours. They simply have to add enough airplanes and hours to mainline to keep DCI within block hour restrictions.

But you didn't base coming to ASA on that...only the firm orders, which, you're getting.

....and ATR pilots from Ransome (Pan Am Express) who were bought and merged into the Delta seniority list.
The Ransome folks were Pan Am pilots when they got to Delta. They weren't merged into the Delta list when they were Ransome pilots. They had a flow thru and got Pan Am numbers. But I thought you wanted nothing to do with a flow-thru right?


OK, now with all the replies to my posts you've done you still:

Have not address the incorrect statements you've made about the CAL MEC and CoEx representation....

Have not provided a source to your statement that DAL's MEC chairmen supposedly made...

Have not acknowledged when you were hired at ASA or your seat position as to what your career expectations really are...

Didn't address my scenerio of "what if RJDC won".....

The peaunut gallery is dying to know the answers to these issues...



Have an alter-ego day!
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
So that means, while you made you're decision based on 268 airplanes, the possibility still exists that DCI will more than double in size by 2005.
No, you know there is no possibility of DCI doubling in size when your contract requires the purchase of three mainline jets for each CRJ over the numerical limits. The mainline jet market is mature and probably constricting - all your contract guaranteed is no growth since there will only be minimal growth amongst the airplanes that feed you passengers. Pan Am tried to run an international airline without feed - look where that got them.
Ransome had a flow thru and got Pan Am numbers
Wrong again - Pan Am extended their list down to capture the Ransome pilots - about the same thing as a staple, but it did result in separate lists for a period of time.
Have not address the incorrect statements you've made about the CAL MEC and CoEx representation....
Refresh my memory - what do you feel has not been addressed? They are separate lists with one MEC and virtually no representation for the COEX pilots. The spin off has been cancelled, for now, but the fact remains that flow throughs are a promise of possible future employment in exchange for concessions now. A flow through would not fix the alter ego problem (which is what I care about). I could give a rats a$$ for getting on the Delta list except for it is the only safety I have from predatory bargaining.
Have not provided a source to your statement that DAL's MEC chairmen supposedly made...
Ask anyone at the Delta codeshare meeting where the "flow through" was allegedly discussed. Any of the ASA MEC members will tell you the same story. Besides was he not a squadron Commander? Why do you think he would care more about a bunch of ALPA ASA pilots compared to his squadron mates? He did not want his military buddies to have to start below a bunch of ASA pilots.
Have not acknowledged when you were hired at ASA or your seat position as to what your career expectations really are...
I thought I did ad nauseum, but again I am a CRJ FO, would like to grow with my airline without artificial scope limitations imposed by my own union
Didn't address my scenerio of "what if RJDC won".....
If the RJDC won then ASA and Comair pilots would enjoy the rights guaranteed in the ALPA Constitution and Bylaws. The rights of membership ratification of contracts that effect our pay and working conditions and the right to negotiate with our employer.

Anything else would be speculation, but I believe DALPA would immediately absorb the Connection pilots before risking contracts at Connection which would make DALPA scope impossible to enforce. For example, what if we negotiated scope of 250 seats and less? Obviously that would be unacceptable to DALPA, they would rather staple us than risk the consequences of us negotiating with Delta outside of their control.

In any event, if the RJDC won, I would be represented by my union and I could feel safe. At the same time the onelist movement would be the renaissance this union needs.

You like to poke fun at my use of alter ego, but don't you agree alter ego is a bad thing?
 
Last edited:

PastMmo

Coffee Serving Ho
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
23
Total Time
5200
Enough is Enough

This thing got started by someone asking the current ASA payscales. Unbelievable. I can't escape it. I come to read about hiring and get a stomach full of RJDC.

Take it somewhere else.

Anybody reading this board has already got a bad taste in their mouth about us ASA pilots.

Suing ALPA? Bad idea. 100 / 600 million dollar suit? Stupid. What's the goal? To punish ALPA... or to sink them?

Contract time coming UP? I think we want them on our side.


Enough said...
 

Tim47SIP

Serving for the USofA
Joined
Dec 5, 2001
Posts
1,157
Total Time
10,000
I to have to agree with fins AKA Prof. I have been at ASA for almost 2 years and had no previous experience with the unions other than research for a MAS degree. I figured that I would sit back and watch how they worked. Frankly I was a little stunned about the closed shop thing in this day and age (getting fired from your job if you didnt pay union dues), with all of the discrimination suits around these days. So here I am, 2 years later, almost 1500 in union dues, and what do I see? I see a union that very much works with industry to achieve a very safe flying environment which I commend them for. I also see a union that very much takes care of some of its members and not others (only the important ones). I understand that DALPA are the big boys, and that is were the money really comes from. But, I also understand that I pay ALPA dues so that they can represent me and my fellow pilots interests. Because it is a closed shop system, this equal representation is even more important. Frankley, I have not seen equal representation at all between mainline and the regionals. Matter of fact, I havent seen any representation by our union to negotioate scope between a mainline and their wholey owned regional. I am not saying it hasent happened, but if it has, it sure wasent publicised.
What I am getting at is that I know the regionals are in no way equal to the mainlines in size or status, but our union should at least set up some sort of dialoge, heck demand it for their own protection, between the parties involved. The outcome might not come out the way the regionals would hope it to, but at least there was dialog and representation. No one can complain about that. But when the ASA MEC was forbidden into the contract negotiations with DALPA concerning ASA and Comair, I have heartburn with that. This to me seems outright dishonest, although I am sure it is legal. I often wonder why ALPA dosn't set up a seperate Regional Affairs section manned by regional pilots and not mainline pilots. I guess they would be fighting themselves?

The RJDC thing.
I think that IFF is way off on his 90%- way off from what I have been hearing. (I AM NOT DEFENDING THE RJDC, THESE ARE JUST MY OWN OBSERVATIONS)

Althought I personally havent made up my mind about the actions of the RJDC, I am having difficulty trying to figure out an alternative course of action as the DALPA MEC and ALPA refuses to negotiate with us at all. Someone correct me on this one as I am under the impression that the suit is against ALPA and not DALPA. I also have been told (reassured) that no monetary action would take place as I would be very much against it if it made one DALPA member pay a cent. My understanding is that it's main purpose is to get ALPA to represent us all fairly, and to rid preditary scope. I know that there is a section about PID, but it is not for DOH but more for staple. I also know that there is a monetary figure for the suit, but that is to get it into court and not to reap any monetary benifit by the plaintiffs when all said and done. Maybe if the DALPA pilots were informed that the RJDC is not a personnal attack against their carriers and pay, that jumpseating would be a little easier. You know that the only information Delta mainline pilots hear concerning these issues is only what DALPA and ALPA want them to hear.

I am not against ALPA in any way shape or form, I think the organization is a very good one. I also think that sometimes it is OK to provide some means of checks and ballances to keep the system honest. This has happened many times during ALPA's tennure. Their have been numerous law suits filed against ALPA by ALPA members and ALPA has not done very well in it's defense as referenced in previous posts. Remember the Pan Am buy out? ALPA was suid by a Pan Am Capt due to discriminatory practices concerning the Pan Am/Delta pilots lists (or something in that area) and won causing ALPA to sell or mortgage one of it's buildings. That pilot not only continued to fly, he is now one of the main figures at ALPA. Additionally, US Air exp is now in a law suit of it's own concerning the same problems. I dont really think the red headed step child thing is accurate here.

fins, IFF, etc. Concerning the size of ASA. I was just informed in the past few weeks that we are starting are first new hire class this month with 40 people. Training has also stated that this will go on for the unforseeable future. What that really means, I dont know. But with the cap of 1700 or so (as stated by Drew Bedson) that was posted by fins in another thread, the numbers dont jive as we are at over 1500 now. I know that Drew knows what he is talking about, so what is up with the new kids on the block as the number cap Drew is stating occures in 2005 and in just 5 months we will be well over that? Additionally, on other threads, we have discussed numbers of aircraft deliveries and E120 numbers. I still think that the final numbers for the end of 02 are still rellivant with maybe the 70 seater lagging behined. Those numbers were 39 deliveries (11 being 70 seaters) between Nov 01 and Dec 02. With only 28 E-120's left, that will leave us with 19 additional airframes with a crew requirement of 180 additional when it is all said and done. We already have 70+ reserve RJ crews on the property now which means we only will need around 40 additional pilots. The numbers of new hires we are bringing in are way over all of the statements made by management. Where is that crystall ball when you need it? If Delta management knows of mainline guys taking our aircraft in the near future, there surely wouldnt be any hiring going on, I would think. I cant help but think that we are not being told the whole story. Ya Think?
OK flame away!
 

ifly4food

ifly4food.com
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
956
Total Time
To Muc
Tim47SIP said:
The RJDC thing.
I think that IFF is way off on his 90%- way off from what I have been hearing. (I AM NOT DEFENDING THE RJDC, THESE ARE JUST MY OWN OBSERVATIONS)
Let's settle this once and for all. Fins, how many members does the RJDC have from ASA? 10% would be 140. I doubt you have even that many at ASA. I still say 90% of us aren't members ( and therefore supporters).

I still think that the final numbers for the end of 02 are still rellivant with maybe the 70 seater lagging behined. Those numbers were 39 deliveries (11 being 70 seaters) between Nov 01 and Dec 02. With only 28 E-120's left, that will leave us with 19 additional airframes with a crew requirement of 180 additional when it is all said and done. We already have 70+ reserve RJ crews on the property now which means we only will need around 40 additional pilots. The numbers of new hires we are bringing in are way over all of the statements made by management. Where is that crystall ball when you need it? If Delta management knows of mainline guys taking our aircraft in the near future, there surely wouldnt be any hiring going on, I would think. I cant help but think that we are not being told the whole story. Ya Think?
Ahh, but new rumors (after all, we never hear anything official, except official disinformation) are that the Brasilias are going away afret all. Word is that keeping them was a post 9/11 plan to temporarily boost the bottom line. Now that the financing has gone through, the jets are coming and the E120s are leaving. That would negate the need for new pilots unless we were still getting all of the new jets we were promised. If this happens, we will quickly hit the scope limits, maybe even exceed them. I don't see the jet lines or jet upgrades staying as bad as they are.
If I'm right, the whole RJDC plan is useless. Fins says he's mad he can't upgrade, so he supports them. What will be the new reason?
 

MetroSheriff

Hittin' the road...
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
854
Total Time
268
Clarification

the numbers dont jive as we are at over 1500 now
Not to nit-pick, but just a clarification. Per the 01/01/02 Seniority List the number is 1402.
 
Top