Statement to Delta MEC
 

I attended the MEC meeting today, and got on the list for open speaking time. I encourage everyone to attend at least one of these to see how our dues dollars are spent, and here is a transcript of my statement:

Members of the Delta MEC:

The last time we saw each other, I was in the back of the room watching you all vote to accept the tentative agreement that the pilots overwhelmingly ratified last week. Immediately following that, a motion was made to vote on it again by roll call, and every one of you got a chance to vote twice on a deal that you all knew three things about.

You knew that the deal wasn’t going to get any better, you knew that if you turned it down the company could hide behind the NMB almost indefinitely, and you knew that the membership would overwhelmingly support the deal.

I’m not even going to get into how the writing was on the wall for us after PEB 250. That’s on you. I think a whole generation will pass before the National Mediation Board allows any case to proceed to a PEB again, but I’m just one pilot.

One vote per MEC member is the default process because it encourages consensus among representatives. In turn, consensus preserves results in collective bargaining, advancing the priorities of many councils, and thereby a larger fraction of the membership. Roll call was intended to serve as a last line of defense for democracy, preventing a minority that is over-represented on the MEC - but under-represented on the line - from imposing their will on the majority.

Roll call was never intended as a safe space, or the means for a rep to avoid political consequences. The MEC vote was 14 to 3, the result in membership ratification was quite different.

I think it’s just dandy that after TA1, the Delta MEC let everyone know how the vote went for each council. This MEC hasn’t done that yet, but the numbers are there for anyone curious enough to inquire:

David Forbes voted against 69 percent of his pilots.

Brian Kolbus was once again out of touch with 75 percent of his pilots.

Tom Kramer, through his proxy, voted against 78 percent of his pilots.

But the best part of this story is over in Council 48. Sam Mason voted against the AIP last December, but he quickly changed his mind once the instructors got a look at the deal and starting asking questions. In the end, 89 percent of instructors supported the TA, the highest level of support for any local council. The Delta MEC wasted a whole day in caucus, hiding from any pilot who might attend the meeting, cooking up a scheme to divide a 14-3 decision so that some of you could hang onto your political ambitions. I guess that worked. Sam Mason made the motion for roll call, and (surprise!) now he’s running for Pilot Director.

A 78 percent result in membership ratification should tell you that it is completely safe to ignore the loudmouths and seagulls who actively campaigned against the desires of an overwhelming majority of the pilots.

Looking ahead, I foresee the company encountering some difficulty in complying with MOU 23-01. They have a lot of code to write, and eye-tee has never been their strong suit. I hope that I’m wrong, and that Delta can find a way to keep its deals with the pilots; failing that, this situation might open a path for follow-on agreements that capture additional gains. My own representatives in Council 44 have written about this very subject in their last update, and I hope the rest of you will see the value of this strategy.

Accomplishing this will require rigid self-discipline from a majority faction of this body that can put product ahead of politics. It is my understanding that the Policy Manual Review Committee will get to work this year, and I can see a number of areas for immediate improvement:

First, the Delta MEC has lost its executive function over the last six years, and reduced the office of master chairman to a figurehead with no actual authority. It is one thing for the MEC to fulfill its duty of oversight, but it is quite another for the MEC to insert politics into the everyday work that serves the pilots who pay for everything around here. You should immediately end the practice of individual confirmations for MEC committee chairs; allow the master chairman to do the hiring and firing, and stop bullying the committee volunteers while you’re at it. Doing this will send the message to management that you trust your elected executive team enough to run the shop. It will also send a message to your membership that the Delta MEC finally prizes things like talent and competency over political reliability, and that stepping up for ALPA work won’t involve working for narcissistic psychopaths.

Second, get rid of the pro-con paper. Two of the three reps who voted against the TA were too lazy to lift a pen afterwards. The pro-con in 2016 was merely weak, this last one was ridiculous. This policy has devolved into rational reps bending themselves into yoga poses and negotiating against their own votes, and you should remove the language from the Policy Manual.

Third, sell the seat on the BOD. The value of the position is the access to intelligence that it provides, which in turn guides the strategic decisions of this body. If we cannot acquire a seat on the Finance Committee, then our Pilot Director will be sitting in the hallway every time the board makes a decision involving money. The Delta pilots who were hired before bankruptcy paid dearly for that seat. If you cannot extract the full value of it because of your political games, then its value should be returned to the pilots through permanent contractual improvements.

Fourth, put an end to “lounge week” and the “duty officer” schemes. Lounge week is a lonely ALPA kissing booth that generates no value except in helping some reps reach the Line Creation Window through pre-posting, and duty officer is a holdover from bankruptcy days, when ALPA could barely pay its bills, and we were so strapped for cash that status reps had to fill in for everyday work at the MEC office. Both of these should be eliminated, and their resources re-directed to subject matter experts in the committee structure that serves the membership.

Fifth, enact a policy that requires anyone who receives Flight Pay Loss to actually fly the line. ALPA work should not be a safe space from working in a cockpit, and any non-qualified ALPA rep, officer, or committee member should get exactly what any line pilot would receive.

Sixth, Close the ALPA disability loophole. Show me a single line pilot who can remain on sick leave for nearly a year and not transition to disability. Pete Van Stee didn’t get that sort of deal, neither did Darren Hartmann.

I was planning to chastise you about the RV, but I recently learned that you all lured the United MEC into buying that rolling money pit, and good on you for that.

I’m done talking now. It's been lovely to see you all again. I’m going back home to enjoy the rest of my day off. Fly safe, and good luck.

Personally I found the 100% votes in favor during roll call sessions far more eye brow raising than those voting against 75-25 or whatever they initially felt.

Big yes to #5

Looking at you, MOD EDIT [LAXFO] rep.

7. Two consecutive terms max, then back to the line forever. And a big Hell to the yeah for your number 5, plus an addition: If you don't fly a full month, MEC members are ineligible for premium pay trips. Dropping an entire month for ALPA work then picking up a greenslip is flat our wrong.

But the pigs are at the trough so all of this is as likely as term limits in congress. And I guess you are trying desperately to get back in too, eh 'starcheck'?

Get rid of MemRat while you're at it and you will be happy as a clam in mud.

Fantastic speech. Eloquent and well written. Agree 100%

14 to 3 is 82%. Memrat was 78%. What am I missing to make that quite different?

1. Ok
2.ok
3. No, access is needed.
4. Ehh, been there and done that. Nobody enjoys it and line guys need a place to vent or ask questions beyond “I know a pilot”.. sometimes it’s the 1:1 to make a difference.
5. Maybe a simple cap of ALV+ would work. There is nothing “fun” to ALPA work. Sure, everyone gets upset over meals and drinks but nobody wants to discuss being on call 24/7/365. Been there, done it in a previous life, do oil changes in the shirts, but the issues that reps deal with tend to be after hours with lots of details outside of the norm.
6. I think language needs to exist at time of disability. Previous life I was doing a lot of ALPA work and got cancer. Disability was an option, and I had plenty of sick time to run me through it with still full pay, but I could still do what I was doing for ALPA on a significant month of buy, many months a full buy. If a medical disability happens, yet doesn’t impact previous and current ALPA work, I don’t see a reason to push someone out. That’s different than someone having a medical issue and going into a full ALPA buy. Personal happenstance but it was disconcerting to be told you have a medical issue and now can’t work because of an issue, that previously wasn’t an issue for what you are doing, with a track record of doing it without a replacement needing months of training. That’s a nerve to hit. May be something to put into a MEC vote to ‘allow continuation for pilot “”abc123” based on previous experience and ALPA resource needs’. Put a timeline on it. Enough to train a replacement for the pilot group, but don’t throw someone using personal time for the pilot group out of the pilot group immediately.

It’s a message board.you said your piece the MEC. Here’s my thoughts on APC.

Somebody has a high opinion of their opinion. More wasted money.

I’m astonished you are with him.

Let’s get those hats on!

What in the world

Thanks for owning it Alan.

Why was it ok when you TA1 yes voters went against the vast majority of the Delta pilots and now your butt hurt by the No voting reps?

Bump. There were some good points mixed in there with the sour grapes, but it seems the MEC vote almost perfectly mirrored the pilot vote. If anything the MEC was more in favor than the pilot group at large so why the angst at the 14-3 vote? Seems pretty representative.

I didn’t vote yes on TA1.
Everyone has a right and a reason to vote however they see fit.
My butthurt is with ALPA flight pay loss abusers.

I was thinking the same. There were some legit points in there mixed in with grandstanding. Often times such long-winded missives are preceded by "an open letter to".

This is why you have to pay a premium for ALPA flight pay loss. Only a select few want to do these jobs, most of us were hired to be pilots. The FPL isn't the problem it's the money that goes to national and never makes it's way back. The frivolous spending mostly happens outside the DALPA budget. Getting GSs work for me and I don't think my reps made significantly more than me. We always complain about FPL and then the people who are familiar with the committees and positions. Nobody wants that job, you have to incentivise it and like any elected position it comes with the politics and coalitions.

You’re not missing anything. This thread is primarily for those who love to get down in the ALPA weeds. Everyone else is moving on.

You will always need ALPA volunteers on full-time FPL. Some of these jobs/positions are time intensive to do and not having the adequate time to accomplish them would ultimately be detrimental to the pilot group.

Additionally, ALPA volunteers on full-time FPL are already capped at 95 hours (I think that’s right). And if they go fly they don’t earn over that. And to go fly would take them away from their full-time ALPA duties. The full-time ALPA volunteers earn much less than their line-flying peers who benefit from being able to pick up green slips and inverse assignments etc. So I just don’t understand what exactly it is that pilots are upset about with this.

To be honest, I think there needs to be a discussion of how to attract talented pilots to do full-time ALPA work. There’s a lot of talent amongst the pilot group and in my opinion not much incentive to do ALPA work. How do you attract top talent to work on behalf of the pilots?

MOD Note
 

I deleted the Reps name in this case (post 3 above) and here is my reasoning. Using a Reps name is OK in most situations - they voluntarily ran for a pretty public position so it can be OK. But if a post makes accusations or insinuates questionable behavior I think it best to just list the position. Delta Pilots know or can find out who the person is so why put someone’s name in public in an unflattering light? Especially if they, may not know it’s out there to respond.


Scoop

Hire non pilots( ie retired company schedulers, retired pilots) to do some of the jobs with proper oversight. Not much different than DGS training instructors. They do the same job as line pilot instructors at a fraction of the cost.

stop it. The MEC members are not even remotely volunteers. They are being paid. WELL paid I might add. To call them volunteers does a disservice to real volunteers.

And it is a flat out lie to say they cannot pick up greenslips. That is complete bull****.

This line of reasoning cracks me up. Aren't reps supposed to represent their individual council? If their Council voted 80% + in favor and they voted no, did they represent their councils will??? I mean the overall percentage worked out (by coincidence) but so what.

If you are offline full time, you are paid 94.5 hours and are expected to work 18 days in the office in ATL. The only way to fly on full time FPL is to do a trip buy. You get per diem and your “pay” for the trip is offset against your FPL. You can’t white slip or green slip or anything else.

If you are not on full time FPL, the rules vary based on reg vs reserve and preposted leave vs leave posted after you have a schedule. Those pilots can green slip like everyone else. There is no cap to what they can make, although some alpa leave is caped if you go over 94.5.

The officers and the chair and vice of the busier committees are in full time FPL. Most committee members come in for a certain amount of time each month (1-2 weeks) and fly the rest of the time.

The vast vast majority of ALPA volunteers get paid little to no FPL to do their jobs. They do it on their off time when the rest of you are out on your 3rd boat and they do it for your, not their, benefit. To claim otherwise is ignorant..

Pilots on full time ALPA leave (officers, committee chairs, etc) cannot pick up premium time. Their pay is capped at 94.5 hours in the Policy Manual, and there are specific office time requirements. Any flying that they do for currency is unpaid.

LEC reps are paid same as line pilots, which they are. They get individual trip drops as ALPA duties require. Their FPL drops are capped at the same 94.5. Any additional ALPA duty must be banked. Their days dropped must equal ALPA duty, otherwise their bank is debited, and if their overall bank is negative, cannot received FPL until it is repaid. Why would a LEC rep do ALPA duty at straight pay when it rains GS/IAs constantly?

I totally get wanting to go on a rant, but at least have the facts right.

I don't know why they do ALPA duty and I don't care. Maybe they are afraid of flying. Just stop referring to them as volunteers. 94.5 hours of pay for "expected" 18 days in the office is not volunteering.

That may be true in the regional world, but not here. The committees which have the work level to justify fpl, get it. Everything done by scheduling, training, r&i, comm, contract admin, etc is done by people on fpl. There certainly is work that exceeds fpl, and that is done on true volunteer time. The smaller committees get as hoc fpl, and do much of their work while not receiving fpl.

I would say that there is work within DAL ALPA that is true volunteer, but not a majority. I would also say that most people who receive fpl do more work than would be required by the policy manual.

94.5 hours for 18 days of work is also far less than what people do on the line.

I'm talking about LEC/MEC members that are compensated for their time.

But you knew that.

So what? Still doesn't make them volunteers.

are you mad about the pay or just the wording?

the wording. If they are 'volunteers', and the pay is so substandard as compared to the regular line pilot, why on earth do they stay for years and years?

Think about it. It is a microcosm of what is wrong with so much of our government in general.

Or maybe the coffee there on Va Avenue is really awesome.

I get it, they are compensated. It's not like they are volunteering their time for Habitat for Humanity. I have some heartburn with the phrasing too. But what do you suggest we call them? They aren't employees. They voluntarily take on different responsibilities from their job. And almost all of them perform work in addition to what they are compensated for, some by quite a large margin.

Good for them? I do a lot more as an LCP than just the bare minimum. Doesn't make me a volunteer.

I guess it has always bugged me that they get referred to as volunteers like they are doing some kind of sucky job as if it is some altruistic endeavor. Many of them are paid as if they are flying but they go home EVERY night.

And I think they ARE employees. They (supposedly) work for us. And tbh I think that is part of the problem with the 'union'. We don't hold them accountable like we should. And now that we have a contract, they will go into management mode.

Honestly guy, you’re so full of it. You kill your own credibility because you so clearly post emotionally-driven tripe and don’t even have the facts. When was the last time YOU volunteered to do anything with ALPA?

The non-pilot staff is also unionized. You can’t just go hiring carte blanche whoever you want. Welcome to UNIONIZED labor. ALPA is a pilot-led union.

A lot of people who actually fly go home every night. What point, exactly, are you trying to make?

While they go home every night they do work at least 18 days, regularly taking work home with them. I think ALPA work and SLI work are some of the most labor intensive jobs. Getting paid while watching the Sunset at the Infinity Pool in SDQ, or over the mountains in LAS from your hotel room before going to hit the blackjack tables is why I love the line. But that's just me. YMMV

Lol. Your a clown
​​​​​​Oh, and you should read the history of how alpa treated those unionized employees of ours when they came up in their contract. The hypocrisy was staggering

Still doesn't make them volunteers.

You're the clown. It’s obvious you’ve never done union work and it shows. There might be a few bad cookies working the system but god bless the rest of them.