There's plenty to complain about in this deal but the snapshot and ratios is not one of them. Clearly, some people don't understand what a ratio is. If the company did decide to park a bunch of mainline aircraft prior to the first snapshot, it would only increase the number of DCI aircraft that would have to be parked to be in compliance with the ratio. There is no opportunity here for the company to quickly add a bunch of RJs and then dump a bunch of mainline aircraft prior to the first shapshot. That would work under our current contract with it's 3:1 language but not with the TA ratios in place. That's the whole point of the ratios. It finally provides us with downside protection which we do not currently have.

 

Continental, Virgin America, Jet Blue, Allegiant, Spirit, FedEx, UPS, Southwest... where is their armada of 76 seaters? You won't find any tidbits about that in the NN. That's a big part of the reason United is still locked in a battle to get a TA. That's a big reason AA never got a contract done. They can't keep us in negotiations forever and those groups will eventually get a contract. 70 more sounds like no big deal but we are setting a precedent here. This contract is bigger than a little 3 year deal, this contract will dictate how all future negotiations will go. We allowed 50+ seaters, that was a mistake and we all know that. Bankruptcy was the excuse. Thankfully we at least have a hard limit, we should not concede that! You can be competitive and not outsource those aircraft.

This is a concession as it is a net increase in relevant outsourced aircraft, scoping out 50 seaters at this point is about as relevant as scoping out helicopters. I can not get past the scope concession to even begin to evaluate the rest of the contract. If we had 100% raises I'd still be stuck on section 1, though from what I saw I'm not real thrilled with the rest of the agreement either. You guys need to snap out of it and realize we're not yet defeated in this area. If we vote this in, however, it's over.

In my opinion our MEC failed to represent us and this should have never gone to memrat. I'm pretty confident, if surveyed, the pilot group would overwhelmingly object to more large RJ's. Will we be able to stay steadfast to that sentiment in the haze of this propaganda? We're about to find out and A4A is keenly interested and watching closely.

We need to defend our brand, we need to defend our profession. The burden now falls upon us, the line slug, to vote this down and recall our leadership. If we allow 70 more in relatively prosperous times we're sending a message that we will only allow more in the future. This is OUR Delta way more than it's Richard Anderson's Delta. Let's send the message loud and clear that we won't allow anymore scope concessions. Maybe then we can eventually negotiate a contract we can be satisfied with.

 

RAH flies to NYC on their code, then connects to a AF flight. I cannot find anything that precludes this from happening.

ALK does it now if someone flies say SEA-LAX-SYD. ALK to LAX then Virgin Australia to SYD. If I recall the ticket can be booked on DAL.com but I do believe the DAL code is used and falls under our Section 1. They can also book on the ALK site and not use our code. Also say Frontier F9 code to ATL then the Korean Air flight to ICN. It cannot be booked on our site without a DAL code attached to the KAL flight so the itinerary would not show up.

On the RAH one it would have to be RAH code, which would be Frontier, then AF. I am not sure AF and RAH have an interline agreement so this sort of paring would not show up on the AF computer network, but it would on internet travel sites.


Within Section one it does not preclude a contractor for code sharing with Skyteam as long it was their code, and not our code.

Again, this was my take two years ago, and I have not been told wrong. Still looking at the TAed new book.

 

It's tricky, and you are missing the stricken sections such as "verification of sick leave will not normally be required for absences less than 7 days". That is gone for a reason!

This new policy creates two sick "buckets". VERIFIED and UNVERIFIED. If you get sick under the TA, you must consider that if you don't go to the Doctor and get a note for the company, it will now count against your 100 hours of UNVERIFIED sick leave. So you'll want to go get that note because if you don't get it while you're sick, there is no way to recapture that UNVERIFIED leave. And since you will be going on your own initiative, the company doesn't have to pay for the visit.

In addition to and inclusive of the above, if you are out more than 15 days, or 100 hours, or for any "good faith" reason the company wants to invent--(over a holiday, after vacation week, etc...) the company now REQUIRES a doctors certificate... For EVERY OCCURRANCE from a Medical Doctor, and in that case, you'd be reimbursed.

But it also begs the question about other reasons you aren't fit to fly, which I won't get into here, but as we all know we must self certify fit to fly. This new scheme would force you to disclose those reasons, whatever they may be.

To me this is a big change, and this used to be the sort of thing ALPA used to look out for us on. But now the NC claims the SLMP is gone when in fact it's been strengthened. This is not good for the pilots of DL.

 

Geeze,


I just looked at section 14. I can't believe I have to write about this, too. You are right. The only thing I disagree with you is where you say I will want to verify every sickness. Because, at the end of the day, it looks to me like the chief pilot, can ask you to verify your sickness anytime they have a good faith reason to question the medical use of your sick time, regardless of the amount of sick time you have verified for the year.

Look at section (14.F.4). (Putting it in practical terms

If a pilot calls in sick during or near a holiday or near his vacation, he or she will be required to state the nature of his or her sickness to a chief pilot, who then may require him or her to provide a doctors note verifying his illness.

Note: It doesn't matter how many times the pilot has called in sick or how many sick hours the pilot has used.


Hey. Didn't the union say they got rid of this? I know I saw it somewhere.....

Slow, am I reading this wrong?

 

Thank you. Wasn't this a big discussion many pages back. If we can't be released to self help to "get scope back" then the company can't lock us out or refuse to negotiate to loosen it. I can't believe I'm asking this but where is Carl when you need him........

 

Airline profits are forecast to be 55% higher in 2012, and 40% higher in 2013. I like 15% profit sharing!

Analysts Raise Airline Estimates Across the Board - TheStreet

 

Elvis;

Personal question: Is any further debate required on this thing?

Let's all just go back to L&G with copious underboob.

 

By all means proceed!

 

New, go back and read my post right before yours, I've edited to explain the pressure to get your illness verified. Thanks...