Heyas,

ACL is right. The ONLY reason we didn't furlough is the flow down provision. It was a complete logistical and financial sinkhole for the company.

No furlough clauses in the contract means absolutely nothing. Not even good to wipe your tail with. The flow down imposed a SERIOUS financial penalty to the airline. THAT you can take to the bank.

Now, whether you agree with the concept of flow down or not, or whether you think we have some moral obligation to the CPZ or MSA pilots on the respective properties that went there on the promise of a flow. Irrelevant to the big discussion.

That discussion is this: The flow down is rock solid furlough protection...proven not only at pre-merger NWA, but at the combined NWA/DAL. Tens, if not hundreds of DAL pilots owe their employment to this.

Management wants to get rid of this. There are some among us who would be happy for management to get rid of it with a stoke of their pen in order to stroke their "Delta hires Delta pilots" ego. Others would waive it away simply because, well, the company asked.

But consider the financial impact that this has had for the pilots, and the protection it serves. The process for getting rid of the flow is in black and while. 1 B 40 e. Pull the seats.

Now, consider the financial impact to the company, and the PERSONAL cost to those pilots who would have most certainly been furloughed. NOT to mention the fiscal givebacks and sacrifice the fNWA pilots gave to put that language in the contract in the first place.

Are you REALLY telling me you want to walk away from that?

Ask yourself: What do you want? Rock solid furlough protection? 68 fewer 76 seat RJs? Replacement 100 seaters on the property? A %20 pay raise?

I don't care what you ask for (well, I do, but it's your call), but for God's sake, ask for something worth what we are giving up.

Nu