Sailing,

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt since there are many of us on the "hold our breath until we turn blue" group (DAL 88, Carl, Amish, et al.), and many things have been said, but you aren't even coming close to what I am saying. What I have said, I have said over and over again: we should ask for what we want. I have also stated that at this point we, as a union, should be asking for exactly what American pilots are asking for in terms of pay and what United pilots are asking for in terms of scope.

If you can't formulate a plan from my earlier posts, here it is:


Now, your "two bites at the apple" side (You, pineapple, acl, et al.) have given several reasons why you believe pursuing this course wouldn't be prudent:

1.) OUR FELLOW EMPLOYEES WILL HAVE SUCH AN ADVERSE REACTION THAT THEY IN TURN WILL TAKE IT OUT ON THE CUSTOMERS AND THEREFORE FINANCIALLY RUIN DELTA.

Even though this is pure speculation, I’m going to let it pass. Let’s say that the other Delta employees will be upset that we get paid so much and total mayhem ensues, which causes disruption at Delta. But Sailing, you can’t have your cake and eat it, too. We don’t live in a vacuum. If you assume that Delta employees would have an adverse reaction to our huge pay raises, then you MUST assume that the pilots of Deltas competitor airlines would have the same reaction. Yes. You must assume that the pilots at American, United, Us Airways, and whoever else, would be just as ****ed as the Delta employees if we got raises and you must assume that they would do just as much to harm their airline as Delta employees would harm Delta. So, at the very least there would be an offset to the harm that the non-pilot employees at Delta would cause –maybe one that is even more beneficial to Delta—right?

Why did you not factor this possibility in your equation, or did you just ignore it?


2.) DELTA AIR LINES WILL BE FINANCIALLY RUINED IF THEY AGREE TO INCREASE OUR CONTRACT BY SUCH A LARGE AMOUNT- SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY CAN’T AFFORD IT.

It seems as though your “two bites” side says that Delta simply can’t afford a $2 billion increase in pilot costs right now. But, on the other hand, you guys are more than willing to leap-frog what American pilots get, after they get it. In fact, many of you say you hope that they get full restoration, so we can pattern bargain. But, what if American’s management decides to jump off the cliff and give their pilots what they want, knowing they can’t afford it? How, in your mind, does that change anything at Delta? It seems to me that if you can’t afford a $2 billion dollar increase in cost, you can’t afford a $2 billion dollar increase in costs, no matter what American does.


Forget about the fact that, if you assume that the increased cost will ruin Delta, you also have to assume that the increased cost will ruin American first. Also, forget about the possibility of United pilots deciding to say at their current United side pay-rates. But, focus on your statements that the good credit ratings you say the company needs for aircraft financing will disappear. Do they not still disappear if both pilot groups ask for and get full restoration?

Either way, for you and others to base your negotiating starting point on what American gets defeats what seems to be one of your goals: Take small bites so Delta can survive. For you and others to say, we’ll ask for the $2 billion only when American gets restoration, shows me that, 1.) You don’t really want American pilots to get full restoration, or 2.) You secretly think that Delta can find a way to afford full restoration, or 3.) You haven’t really thought your argument through.


3.) DELTA AIRLINES WILL EXTEND NEGOTIATIONS IF WE ASK FOR TOO MUCH.

Finally, it seems that for your argument to work you need Delta Air Lines and their negotiators to have a vengeful personality where they would view an opening by us, that attempted to achieve restoration, as some type of personal insult which would send us down a slippery path to a management vs. pilot war that we could never return from. That is debatable. I would think that if we determined that the economic environment required us to back down from an opener where we asked for restoration, and we did so, Delta would be all for it.

But, either way, I believe your desire to ask for little bites and therefore take two bites at the apple is flawed. At the very least, my way is better than yours. Why? Because, with your way, once you start down the little bite path, there is no going back. If you open by asking for a little bite, you cannot come back during the negotiations and ask for a big bite later. That’s called negotiating in bad faith. If we tried to go back and ask for restoration after we opened with asking for a small bite, there is not an arbitrator, mediator, judge or jury in the land who would see our new strategy as being fair to Delta. With my way, we can always retreat to whatever your position is for whatever reason, with no repercussion.



Now, to me, it doesn’t seem that any of the above mentioned arguments you guys have against us asking for what we want hold any water. I have stated that I at least want to stand behind the American pilots and United pilots at this time, by letting their management teams know that we will not undercut them or settle for less than what they get. I have also stated that I want to let Delta Air Lines do their job. If the Delta pilot group thinks they deserve restoration, then it’s up to Delta to figure out how to pay it, explain why they can’t, or try to convince me that I’m not worth it. When we took those huge paycuts earlier this decade to save the company, NWA didn’t ask us how we would manage, we just voted them in and all pilots had to deal with it. I still don’t make what I made in 2001, but I dealt with it. Now, it’s time to ask Delta for restoration. I want to give them the chance to deal with it. Nothing should stop us from asking the question.

Unfortunately, it seems that some of you seem to think that is your job and/or the job of DALPA to tell us that we shouldn’t even ask. I cannot disagree with that position more strongly. It’s never a union’s job to make excuses for the company. They hire people to do that; I shouldn’t have to pay dues for the privilege.

I’m sure you and others will point out some misstatement or misconception I have about something or another, but it won’t change the bottom line.