No Voters: Why are you voting no?
10-26-2016, 05:22 PM
#141
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: Power top
Posts: 2,959
Originally Posted by MrBojangles
what would you be willing to "trade" for a 50% raise?
Let's vote on it in the light of day. Pro con, warts and all.
10-26-2016, 05:48 PM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 551
Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley
First child, my Chessie retriever(best bird dog ever) and everyone under 2 years with the company. Is that enough? You'd lop me off the top for sure. I'll be dead in a few years anyway. No pilot left behind.
Let's vote on it in the light of day. Pro con, warts and all.
Let's vote on it in the light of day. Pro con, warts and all.
10-26-2016, 07:18 PM
#143
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Originally Posted by sailingfun
I don't need to address it because it's no more likely then my next flight getting hit by a meteor.
10-26-2016, 07:20 PM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Originally Posted by JamesBond
I don't yet have enough information, but thanks for your interest in my opinion.
Jesus, we are fk'd.
10-26-2016, 07:27 PM
#145
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Originally Posted by notEnuf
edited above for clarity, still doesn't require agreement
I would like to hear the expectation of the NC regarding this. The language isn't as strong as it could be. One more question for the road show I guess.
I would like to hear the expectation of the NC regarding this. The language isn't as strong as it could be. One more question for the road show I guess.
Denny
10-26-2016, 07:36 PM
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,027
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
Ok, if you say so. But to me that language says if one of the companies leaves the JV, our company and dalpa will meet and confer to discuss the company's baseline EASK share and the minimum EASK share. Sounds like legal speak for renegotiation to me. The object of renegotiation being an agreement.
Denny
Denny
10-26-2016, 08:10 PM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Originally Posted by notEnuf
Thanks for the input. I'm not really as cynical as I post but having poor or intentionally weak language in the PWA has haunted my entire career. Try reading your credit card agreement or your insurance policy. That is specific language with enforceable intent. Too many lawyers in the family I guess.
Denny
10-27-2016, 02:35 AM
#148
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by 300SMK
Dont you think if one is a WB LCA or ALPA communicator you should know this type of information? It's only WB scope.
Jesus, we are fk'd.
Jesus, we are fk'd.
10-27-2016, 07:01 AM
#149
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
Ok, if you say so. But to me that language says if one of the companies leaves the JV, our company and dalpa will meet and confer to discuss the company's baseline EASK share and the minimum EASK share. Sounds like legal speak for renegotiation to me. The object of renegotiation being an agreement.
Denny
Denny
Furthermore, why even put 48.5% in the contract if immediately after it allows 46.5%? Who comes up with this stuff?
10-27-2016, 12:20 PM
#150
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
To me, that essentially means renegotiation.
But what happens next? After the "addressing of their concerns" in this TA, we'd better build a great wall on a ridge on this one. No more gives.
But does "renegotiation" here give us any leverage? I doubt the company will scuttle that portion of the network entirely. So the rest better be divvied up in a manner favorable to us for a change. 46.5% is half? I don't think so. We should get a greater than 50% share of the reallocation IMO.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
