Originally Posted by acl65pilot

DAL88;
I agree with many of your items. The pro con papers are a great idea but they need to be done correctly. The cannot be rants, but fact based. I have had an education on these by some of the former authors. It is important to know what works and what does not, but I do agree that they need to be done. They have to talk about the same items and issues and cannot just be papers written from the hip. That goes for both pro and con.


The con paper should be written by someone who is truly against the issue. If I recall correctly, AW wrote a con paper, but he wasn't actually against what he was debating. SD used to write an excellent dissenting opinion - I'd like him back.


I do not mind reps telling me why they voted for it and why they think the TA of this or that is a good deal. I do agree that selling something over and above this should be toned down. Let your reasoning be your argument.

The sales job is as much because DALPA has been unanimous in their opinion that it was the best they could do. Rather than say that though, they sell what they got.


I have talked to a bunch of guys that voted yes on LOA 46 and 51 and well as LOA 19/JPWA and asked them what lead them to their votes. Not one of them mentioned fear mongering even after I asked if they though the "fear" card was played and whether or not it effected them. Most just understood on some level where they and the company were.

FEAR was the ONLY reason to vote yes to these - FEAR of losing one's job. How is that not FEAR? I voted no because pensions should be TAKEN by the bankruptcy judge and voted NO because some companies -if they are poorly managed and run, should go out of business. Full pay to the last day, where's our snapback clause.

I will state that if the company keeps making tons of money, many of these guys are going to demand a lot of it back too. Fact is that most of the guys feel the company cannot afford restoration. No fear mongering is needed for them to come to that conclusion. The just read the 10K.
This is not my opinion but that of the guys and gals I fly with. Many do not see the company in a position to afford a 2-3 billion dollar per year bump in our compensation unless others follow suit.

Like I have said, if you want to change that, DPA is not going to do it. It needs to be done by education and a heck of a lot of work by each and every pilot that wants guys to understand what you demand ALPA does not get. Again, it is not ALPA that you need to change, it is the majority position of the pilots. Get them to tell DAL to restore pay, retirement, work rules etc, and then get them to back it up. Until then it does not matter who is doing your negotiating. The votes will still fall the same way.