Friday, August 12, 2011

Delta Pilots Associaiton update

Updates to the Delta Pilots Association meeting are coming out piecemeal using words that are, well, carefully worded.
The August 10th DPA meeting in ATL was a huge success! 
According to the AJC article posted on the DPA website "about 20 fellow Delta pilots" attended the meeting in a meeting room set for 200. You can see the empty room in the photos on their page.

Delta Pilots Association founder Tim Caplinger told a group of about 20 fellow Delta pilots gathered at a Wednesday morning meeting that his trust in the pilots' current representation "has been damaged."

We find this next DPA so-called fact very interesting.

At an ATL MEC meeting several months ago, Captain O'Malley, MEC Chairman, stated that: "All changes to scope are off the table."
We've been making phone calls and can not find one single representative that heard anything of the sort. As a matter of fact they reminded us that there was a scope resolution. We have asked ALPA Watch and their relationships with MEC Insiders to see if they can find any witnesses to this extremely incendiary allegation.

So far there is not a single thing that proves this DPA allegation. They are even so bold as to quote him instead of indexing rumors like their supports on the ALPA boards.

They further go on to suggest wording you use for your own contract survey.

 "I request the DAL MEC pursue a 20% reduction in allowable regional carrier airframes that are capable of, or currently contain, 70 or more seats to be completed within no later than two years from the date of signing of our next contract."  

They contend:

This reasonable request is well within the capability of the company to comply with,

The Delta Pilots Association thinks that it is reasonable to ask for only a 20% reduction in regional feed. We've been hearing much more aggressive requests. Their independence is supposed to get them from their alleged conflict of interest. So why only 20%? Does that mean they also realize that regional feed is required? Why stop short of demanding 100%? Why would that not be reasonable?

DPA is aware that regaining flying under DPA leadership will be a process of many steps just like it was removed from us in many steps.
What? If ALPA is the conflict and removing ALPA removes the conflict why can't they just get rid of all feed?

We look forward to hearing from the Delta Pilots Association on the other 800 or so moving parts in our scope language in addition to just regional carriers. They seem very focused on only one small part of Section 1.

Why is that?