Airline Pilot Central Forums
Page 4 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   JV Perspective (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/100278-jv-perspective.html)

gzsg 03-02-2017 11:36 AM
Originally Posted by Bradshaw24 (Post 2312362)
No need to be drama queen Jerry. I'm not selling anything. I just stated that if there are JVs with AM and Korean that I'd like to see JV language in our contract that protects us.
We agree 100% on that.

This is a GIVEN, not a gain.

I fear Scott and Sam will sell this as a gain.

We all know what a gain is.

Planetrain 03-02-2017 12:10 PM
Why the focus on C44? There's not a LOA to "sell" unless the MEC chairman brings it to the floor. Don't we have "hardliner" MEC officers now?

Hank Kingsley 03-02-2017 02:23 PM
Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2312354)
There you go.

The selling begins.

A JV LOA is a win. Because we can protect our flying.

Tell us. What happens if management violates this scope balance?

Oh wait, let me tell you.

First we wait an extended period listening to their excuses about why they can't meet their obligation. During this period the usual suspects parrot management's excuses.

Then we file a grievance.

Then after a long wait, we settle. For what? Upgrades and jobs added?

No.

A check for a few hundred bucks after taxes.

If we sign an LOA,

WE NEED MAJOR GAINS IN OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AND RETIREMENT.

Increased value of a vacation day, minimum day, increased value of a training day.

18% DC
And a real health insurance plan.

Bradshaw24 03-02-2017 02:30 PM
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 2310321)
What's with your focus on Mason? He was one of the original scope hawks...
To be fair, he was also brought us and was in favor of TA1, and according to you he should have been recalled.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 2288453)
The people that brought on and sold hard the pitiful failure that was TA2015 were worthy of recall. Bring on a failure like that, and it is certainly worthy of recall.

NERD 03-02-2017 03:18 PM
Curious here. Are the pilot groups in our JVs(AF, KLM, Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Australia, soon AM, KAL and China something) concerned about getting their fair share, or do they know that they will get the better end of the stick? I think I know the answer:(

80ktsClamp 03-03-2017 02:06 AM
Originally Posted by Bradshaw24 (Post 2312484)
To be fair, he was also brought us and was in favor of TA1, and according to you he should have been recalled.
Words are important, and clearly you didn't pay attention to what you quoted. Attention to detail is important in our profession, and you lack it consistently in agenda pushing. Sold hard was the final and most important caveat. Mason did not do that. I told him I couldn't vote yes for it, and he never once questioned my decision.

Karnak 03-03-2017 03:24 AM
Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2312384)
We all know what a gain is.
Do we?

1. Was TA2 a gain?
2. How'd you vote on that gain?

How about, "We all know what a gain is, but each of us has different priorities, and differing views on how to achieve gains."?

Bradshaw24 03-03-2017 07:03 AM
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 2312696)
Words are important, and clearly you didn't pay attention to what you quoted. Attention to detail is important in our profession, and you lack it consistently in agenda pushing. Sold hard was the final and most important caveat. Mason did not do that. I told him I couldn't vote yes for it, and he never once questioned my decision.
Your hypocrisy is showing again. He brought it and sold it just as much as the others. His name was on the same joint letter. Not saying it's wrong for reps to give their perspective and endorsement, they all did, on both sides of the vote, just highlighting your glaring double standard.

notEnuf 03-06-2017 09:19 AM
Cryptic article. More ownership and JVs to come is my guess.

https://deltaairlines.sharepoint.com...-U-S--SEC.aspx

gloopy 03-08-2017 07:47 AM
Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2312354)
WE NEED MAJOR GAINS IN OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AND RETIREMENT.
I agree with your concerns and also agree that the penalties for non compliance are woefully inadequate. However it seems you're advocating for selling the jobs as long as we get said gains. IMO that's the wrong strategy. In doing so, all we do is add pressure to help push more jobs out.

If we grant relief in any area for supposed gains in another area WRT scope, we need to write in massive penalties. We can and we have before. The contractual penalties of making them pull seats out of 76 seat 90 seaters and forcing Compass to park all their planes and/or a catastrophic 100% bump and flush (both ways in a short period of time) were both extremely effective deterrents to various MBA shenanigans post merger.

We don't need to sell jobs for gains. We need to protect jobs and add in massive penalties for non compliance.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:07 AM.
Page 4 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands