Originally Posted by
newKnow
Alfa,
You,. ts, and slow, keep giving us money reasons as to why we would be smart to vote yes. But, have you guys noticed that the majority of pilots have gotten over the pay. It looks to me like 95% of the negative TA post on this forum and the ALPA board are jobs & staffing arguments.
You shouldn't be surprised, but your "we had better take the money while we can" & "time value of money" arguments aren't working. Why?
We are the same pilot group today that we were 3 months ago. Three months ago, we said we would give up huge pay increases to protect scope. We said we couldn't be bought of. We said money wasn't everything.
Now, not only is there huge confusion about holes in the scope clause, enforceability, and carve outs, but there are also work rule changes that insure the company can do the same job with less pilots.
As far as I can tell, there is not one section of the TA where Delta pilots can stand up and say that is a stand alone winning issue for us with no concession to give back to the company to lessen the effects.
More than money, Delta pilots are worried about their jobs. What good does a huge pay-raise do anyway if you are bidding a category or two lower aircraft? We are not blind, but because we have good memories, we are understandably gun shy.
Keep that in mind.
First, this forum and the ALPA forum are in no way indicative of the pilot group. On this forum Scope is by far the biggest issue and in the contract survey it was far behind pay. So reading this forum will not give you an accurate view of the pilot group.
It's not just money, it's all the rest. Please tell me how a negotiation will end where only one side wins. We won concessions from Delta even in bankruptcy with a gun to our head. So if you are waiting for some negotiation where only one side's issues are addressed then you better get used to this contract because you will retire under it. If you walk into the NMB and demand only concessions from the company, they will pat you on the head and tell you to come back when you are serious. Please go see the experience of the APA and USAPA for excellent examples of this type of demand bargaining.
Our reserve system is industry leading, our sick leave is industry leading. Our pay is industry leading. Our scope is ground breaking in the control we have over the DCI operation and its relation to mainline. Look at what you demand and what the company is offering in the TA from the perspective of an outside observer (the NMB) and not from the perspective of a pilot that is shooting for the perfect contract. We are already far ahead of our major competitors and about to lap the field. Do you think the NMB will support us moving even further out or will they put us on ice?
No one can guarantee you some growth or upward movement. We have laid the foundation to ensure mainline growth in a neutral or even slightly down economic environment. Past that, you will never have a guarantee. You don't have it now and you won't ever in the future. You will never convince a neutral third party that you have to have that either.
So you are trying to gauge this in light of some perfect contract you imagine. I say you should gauge it in light of how you could force that perfect contract. That will only happen if the NMB allows us to strike. Even if you believe they would allow a strike, they have shown time and again that the type of contract you seek is unavailable until the fiery end of humanity. How many years of watching pilots getting put in the naughty corner will it take for people to learn how to not go to the naughty corner. Airways 7, American 6, Continental 4, United 3. That's twenty years of experience right there.
Go back and read the NMB presentation on the ALPA website. She was giving you a road map to contract success and warning you how to stay out of the naughty corner. Negotiate, zone of reasonableness, listen to your professionals, 29 months in mediation. The railroads consolidated like the airlines are now except it was in the 1990's. Since then, no strikes multiple PEB's. Why would she take the time to point that out to us? Just interesting fun facts or a warning of what's to come?
It seems to me that most on this board think she was joking. She has no agenda to lower your expectations, she is giving advice and has the hammer to make you follow her advice. Maybe we really do need four years on ice to learn our lesson. Expensive lesson, in money, scope, and everything else. Maybe you are right and it's just our turn to touch that stove and see how hot it is.