Originally Posted by
KC10 FATboy
Respectfully, I strenuously object.
If there are different copies with omitted language ... or even worse changed language, this is a big deal.
People could be casting a vote for or against an inaccurate TA which they believed to be the source document.
If in fact there have been changes in the language or omitted TA language, then DALPA should be doing an all posts bulletin or NOTAM to every member's email, v-file etc. etc.
Worse, what if DALPA's version of the TA differs than what DAL management has? How do we know? Did DAL management post a copy of the TA as they believe it to be?
I admit, this is my first contract negotiation besides the merger stuff. However, it really seems like we have the JV team representing us right now especially when considering how much these guys in DC make.
Sure, if several things have changed I agree. And if people can site these that would make a great case however, I have read through both copies I have and the only thing I noted was what I mentioned above.
If there are others I would like to know but I have a feeling this was just an omission in getting the document out. The contract was correct for the better to the NNP.
Too bad they didn't put that the 76 seaters were being reduced by 70 aircraft in the NNP and then edit the contract to read that way. That would make this TA much more likely to pass.
