Originally Posted by
Hillbilly
Understood Carl. I shouldn't have implied you were not being truthful. I misread what you were saying. Your post gave me the impression that DALPA had the data and they made the choice to purposefully not share it, as you made no mention of lack of permission, etc. Last time around we were told the reason for it not being published in the comparison was because the other pilot groups had specifically asked DALPA not to do so. Your post only made sense to me if they had gotten permission this time, thus actually giving them a choice to make regarding whether or not they included the info in the Contract Comparison. That is why I asked for the clarification, but I agree that I shouldn't have implied you were lying.
My apologies.
Sent from PD's fridge where his drank got me leanin' using Tapatalk
No problem.
The key is that DALPA has the data and specifically refuses to use it in comparisons...even in the most general way. This is what I don't understand. In the past, my other ALPA airlines used every trick in the book to make us look like we were one step away from a poverty contract. I admit that I was even a little embarrassed sometimes at the logic and data used to make us look like we needed 100% wage gains just to keep starvation away.
With DALPA, we've gone to the opposite extreme. We find excuses to disqualify data that would help us. AF/KLM data is one example. During C2012, we had many posters here express reasons why SWA couldn't be used because of the single fleet type and associated cost savings, while other said we couldn't use FDX/UPS because they weren't even in the same business we were. These same people (now known to be elected reps and MEC admins) wanted the comparisons to be with UsAirways, American and jetBlue.
For an old fart like me, it is this change among our own union members that floors me.
Carl