Originally Posted by
Sink r8
I'm more... repulsed. I'm not an MEC-hater, but I don't want my compensation to come from funds they receive. I want it to come from equipment I fly. Any "compensation" we get in JV's need to come back to us in other forms, i.e. jobs elsewhere. If they want relief somewhere, they pay it elsewhere.
If all we ant are cash payouts from granting relief, we could simply have one multi-millionaire "Delta Pilot", and outsource everything else.
This is why ALL parts of the contract (or LOA or whatever) are important and need to be understood by the membership. I personally love the idea of gaining a percentage of the revenue, but I would vote no if it came without strong scope protections.
The fact is that the company will want more globalization, and some of that could be good for us as pilots. It is the job of our MEC to determine what will benefit us and what will not. When they decide to negotiate with the company to enter into a JV, it then becomes their job to extract as much value for our pilots as is reasonably possible. In the past this has come in the form of promises of more flying and a better balance sheet so that we can get better value in future contracts. The results have varied depending on who you talk to and are quite honestly hard (for the average line pilot) to quantify.
If the next time around we can score job/scope protections
as well as a cut of the revenue it could mean thousands, if not tens of thousands, of dollars for each pilot. Each one of these JV's are worth billions to the company and DALPA has some considerable leverage when negotiating to allow one. Would the company jeopardize a multi-billion dollar deal because they don't want to pay the pilots 1 or 2% of that. I don't know, but I would like to see us tip-toe up to that line. You get nothing if you ask for nothing. I don't think anyone is trying to sell scope, just get the maximum value out of what our MEC has decided will be our course of action.