Originally Posted by
newKnow
Hummm. Why does Delta have to file in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Georgia? What if the majority of their cancelled flights are in NYC? Also, are you saying the federal court would handle the contract dispute and SD's memo?
Even if they do, what difference does it make? Are you saying the Court would immediately rule on the issue of interpreting what Delta did and not have to issue an injunction in the face of Delta canceling flights?
So, my opinion isn't based in law? Ok. If you say so, but I'm pretty sure this is the opinion the company would use as the framework for it's case against us. The good stuff begins on page 63. I think it's more pertinent than the case law you posted.
https://crewroom.alpa.org/ual/Deskto...cumentID=44168
I also guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on whether or not Delta would be able to fly their schedule with an increase of long call pilots getting PD's for assigned trips. From what I see, Delta is going to have trouble finding pilots for some flights already - especially for the summer. This is without any more of an increase of reserve pilots getting PD'ed from trips.
Finally, your fall back provision of not caring if Delta is successful in getting an injunction against us is problematic. What do you, mean "…so what?"
As, I said before, we have the high ground. Even though it's taking a while, SD's memo is just as impossible to follow as the company believes our contract is to follow under the new 117 rules. Our pilots will be repaid for the PD's. So, why waste time on a losing cause that has a chance to blow up into something worse?
So, what? So, I want to win. What do you want to do?
I think if DALPA would have come out and said, " Fly the contract, and this is what the contract requires us to do, and this is what we are not required to do", we would have had our heads handed to us by the first court Delta called.
We had to read between the lines, there were signals in the DALPA communications telling us they had our back, but they couldn't come right out and say ANYTHING suggesting that we should do anything other than what we were currently doing. If you are a commuter and want to know what your assignment is immediately so you can plan your commute, like a lot of us, they can't encourage you to stop doing that. If all of a sudden, everyone started acknowledging 3 hours prior, Delta would have been able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a job action. They have reams of data on sick calls, and I'm sure they would have reams of data on reserve assignments and verification times pre and post FAR 117 within 3 hours.
The problem isn't with how DALPA handled this situation, they couldn't do anything more than tell us they would help us if a problem came up. The problem, by virtue of DALPA's historically cozy relationship with management, was that we didn't trust them. We didn't believe they would protect us or go to bat for us. Very few guys were willing to take one for the team if it was possible our team already agreed to throw the game. In other words, 1: A lack of unity, and 2: A concern over how behind us our union was going to be, are the issues everyone is arguing over. I think DALPA did all they could with the printed word, however, we have a long way to go if we are going to trust them to have our interests and needs as their first priority.
Thank you to everyone who "leaned into the pitch". Hopefully the next batter doesn't hit into a double play.
And Go Cubbies!
E