Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   MOU 25-05 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/151540-mou-25-05-a.html)

ancman 12-24-2025 04:30 PM


Originally Posted by NJGov (Post 3985149)
I don’t understand where some of you keep standing behind the company’s “promise” to implement QS?

im pretty near certain they won’t come before a TA because they know how much it divides us as a group

but can anyone of you “PRO” MOU people can show me where the company completely, swiftly, or correctly fulfilled a promise in this decade I’ll eat crow and start supporting it myself

If they fail to implement it, then management negotiated 25-05 in bad faith.

That said, I agree with the rest of what you wrote. That’s exactly why 25-05 needed to be exposed to member input and MEMRAT prior to signing. It contains no teeth whatsoever. Some of the sharpest minds on the MEC, such as SK, were against 25-05 due to poor construction.

theUpsideDown 12-24-2025 04:44 PM


Originally Posted by GutterGuard (Post 3985152)
Management's greatest piece of leverage comes from reading APC

sorta.

If the company can find a way to magnify the internet guys they can certainly make it seem like its a lot of us. However they can fool themselves too.

pilots are kinda control freak type A weirdos that feel like their own hands are safest. The union needs to get more personal communication, listen, and earn trust.

Believe me, if every pilot talked alike and refused to talk to management about negotiations this thing would be quick. That isnt realistic.

Keep answering polls, call your reps, listen to what they say, and if we got bad ones vote them out.

Puddytatt 12-24-2025 08:31 PM


Originally Posted by NJGov (Post 3985149)
but can anyone of you “PRO” MOU people can show me where the company completely, swiftly, or correctly fulfilled a promise in this decade I’ll eat crow and start supporting it myself

I'm definitely not a pro MOU pilot, but the company promised to redo the April 2020 bids via LOA 20-01. And they did. 🤣🤣

SideStickMonkey 12-25-2025 08:08 AM


Originally Posted by ancman (Post 3985116)
That merely provides further context that you have no idea how negotiations work in this industry.

Right. We didn't force the company to pay 3x to cover trips (or 4x if/when QS are implemented), they choose that path.

That's some 4-D chess the company is playing.

ancman 12-25-2025 09:14 AM


Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey (Post 3985243)
Right. We didn't force the company to pay 3x to cover trips (or 4x if/when QS are implemented), they choose that path.

That's some 4-D chess the company is playing.

They brought it on themselves with ARCOS and willingly agreed to the contractual language that caused their problems. Their attack on batch sizes was the nail in the coffin for them.

SideStickMonkey 12-25-2025 09:28 AM


Originally Posted by ancman (Post 3985257)
They brought it on themselves with ARCOS and willingly agreed to the contractual language that caused their problems. Their attack on batch sizes was the nail in the coffin for them.

Yeah so the company made a bunch of willing errors to give the pilot group leverage going into Section 6.

Right

Xray678 12-25-2025 09:34 AM


Originally Posted by ancman (Post 3985257)
They brought it on themselves with ARCOS and willingly agreed to the contractual language that caused their problems. Their attack on batch sizes was the nail in the coffin for them.

the attack on batch sizes sped it up ….but people would have starting over using auto accept regardless.

hockeypilot44 12-25-2025 11:33 AM


Originally Posted by Xray678 (Post 3985262)
the attack on batch sizes sped it up ….but people would have starting over using auto accept regardless.

When did we get auto accept? I definitely remember having auto ack only. We had Arcos prior to auto accept.

ancman 12-25-2025 11:59 AM


Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey (Post 3985261)
Yeah so the company made a bunch of willing errors to give the pilot group leverage going into Section 6.

Right

Intentional errors? Most likely not.
Errors? Absolutely.

tennisguru 12-25-2025 01:53 PM


Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey (Post 3985243)
Right. We didn't force the company to pay 3x to cover trips (or 4x if/when QS are implemented), they choose that path.

That's some 4-D chess the company is playing.

Pay will not be 4x when QS are implemented. QS will pay double + single pay for the skipped person. 4X pay I think only comes into play if they skip QS to go to IA, which functionally will almost never happen. The only time I see them skipping QS is for the extremely rare one-offs where there’s say a 330 FO who lives in HNL and they need a 330 FO in HNL but can’t get one there and legal to fly for a day and a half so they skip to the local pilot for immediate availability.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:09 AM.


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