|
|
Dr. House finale tonight. :(
|
Can't find the wording for Minimum Daily Pay. What is the new daily pay/credit in the TA?
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1193338)
This is a fascinating comment. So the contract is 477 pages (I'll take your word for it) That is a difficult assignment no doubt, and since it is written by ********* lawyers FOR ********* lawyers, it is esoteric, vague, hard to read language. But...... if DALPA comes out in road shows to explain the contract language in plain English that most of us speak, it is a "sell job". I guess they can't win that, huh?
(And this is not a comment on YOU Sink...) |
Originally Posted by Going2Baja
(Post 1193340)
They can have ALL the 76 seaters they want....but flown w/ DAL pilots. What's so difficult to understand?
Baja. |
Originally Posted by CAAC ATP
(Post 1193351)
^^^^^This in the TA would have been nice.
TEN PS. The people on our negotiating team must be a wet-dream for a car salesman, HAHAHAHAHA!!!!:D:D<--I had to vent |
Originally Posted by PinnacleFO
(Post 1193341)
What is this, is this in section 1 of the agreement? What does it mean? Alpa carriers would be Express JET Pinnacle/Mesaba, compass and comair. 35% of a class of 50 would be 17 split between 5 companies. The question is, where do you get the rest of the candidates when united and usair will also be hiring later.
The issue I have is that this wording further brings the ALPA conflict of interest to Delta's doorstep front and center. It also is contractual and further cements ALPA's position as the bargaining agent for DCI carriers...of which there are some non-ALPA affiliated carriers. This isn't about unity, this is about ALPA the Corporation. |
Originally Posted by Roadie85
(Post 1193344)
Can't find the wording for Minimum Daily Pay. What is the new daily pay/credit in the TA?
|
Originally Posted by Waves
(Post 1193334)
OK, I知 glad you guys are on top of this, but I知 still in my normal confused state. Ha I知 still trying to figure out the IRS tax code changes. LOL I think for several years the crooked line in the sand standard has been based on the 76 seater. What I知 hearing here is that an increase in 70 seaters is a No-Go issue. Where do you guys draw the line regarding seat count? I知 not sure I would disagree, but I壇 like to hear an opposing view. I would actually like to see ALL aircraft in our system flown by DAL pilots, but it seems like an unrealistic idea.
If the TA scope went into effect and the company bought a magical number "88" particular narrow bodies planes: DCI would be hard capped at 450 airplanes and 29930 seats. A permanent reduction of 148 airframes and 5580 seats, plus all the block hour protections. But there are big scope gains elsewhere also, let's not lose sight of other aspects of scope. |
Originally Posted by JobHopper
(Post 1193355)
4+30 per day, unless report is after 2200 or checkout is before 0200.
|
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1193354)
The truth is, I dont have a problem with the concept of hiring people who have been flying DAL passengers for years. That is NOT the issue I have.
The issue I have is that this wording further brings the ALPA conflict of interest to Delta's doorstep front and center. It also is contractual and further cements ALPA's position as the bargaining agent for DCI carriers...of which there are some non-ALPA affiliated carriers. This isn't about unity, this is about ALPA the Corporation. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:22 AM. |
|
Website Copyright ｩ 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands