Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-25-2012, 12:08 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by Ragtop Day
Correct me if I am wrong, but I understood the company agreed to stop flying the aircraft. This agreement would allow them back in.
Just to be a devils advocate for a second; those jets fly large Dal corporate contacts which bring a lots of revenue. We did just allow something we filed a grievance over though.
05-25-2012, 12:10 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by gloopy
Maybe a charter, but they are planning a full on assault on DL over the next year or two. At least 3 of our hubs. Based on rolling over and giving up BOS without a whimper, they are probably feeling saucy that we'll let them have their way in ATL, DTW and MSP while letting them set the fare buckets.
05-25-2012, 12:16 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
I don't think anyone here disagrees with your math here tsquare. I just have a few questions:
1. Where in the survey did it ask how much we wanted to paid above UsAir?
2. When did our MEC state that we'll be happy and not go forward with a traditional Section 6 as long as we can agree in an expedited manner to be paid above UsAir wages?
Because I missed that. I only remember an MEC Chairman that stated this expedited negotiations must produce a contract that satisfies our pilots based on their survey results. If those don't happen, we begin a traditional Section 6 process. The MEC reneged on that PROMISE.
Carl
1. Where in the survey did it ask how much we wanted to paid above UsAir?
2. When did our MEC state that we'll be happy and not go forward with a traditional Section 6 as long as we can agree in an expedited manner to be paid above UsAir wages?
Because I missed that. I only remember an MEC Chairman that stated this expedited negotiations must produce a contract that satisfies our pilots based on their survey results. If those don't happen, we begin a traditional Section 6 process. The MEC reneged on that PROMISE.
Carl
YOUR pay metric won't necessarily be the same, and there ARE differences because of the DC contribution rates. But you have a full defined benefit plan... (probably not at 747 rates, and I guess it really must suck to have 330 rate to calculate it with...) There are many DAL pilots that will have more money in their pockets at the end of this agreement than will SWA pilots. It is a significant bite of the apple. The next dot on the scale.. which we will be able to start working toward as soon as the ink is dry on this one, will be the UPS 767 rates. And that will happen in less than 3 years. That is the dot that will keep you from leaving when you should.
So keep encouraging all the junior guys to vote this down Carl. YOU have nothing to lose..... You have yours.
05-25-2012, 12:23 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
That's not at all certain because:
1. This TA keeps the same loophole language available to the company that allows them to claim "events beyond their control" for damn near anything except a very narrow list of items.
2. Our very union has a history of modifying these items that appear to constrain management depending upon the needs of management. Sometimes these modifications are done by a single MEC bureaucrat via an MOU as opposed to MEMRAT.
3. The jury is WAY OUT on the whole prospect of whether any attempt by our union to force another union to lose jobs based on a contract that they didn't sign, would even be legal. It would certainly produce a DFR against ALPA by the agrieved RJ airline, and could well produce a lawsuit against DAL for violating the Railway Labor Act. This is competely unsettled law here. None of us are in any position to feel confident about the language that appears to force ANOTHER AIRLINE to reduce their RJ count or the block hours they fly those RJ's.
This is incredibly dangerous legal ground.
Carl
1. This TA keeps the same loophole language available to the company that allows them to claim "events beyond their control" for damn near anything except a very narrow list of items.
2. Our very union has a history of modifying these items that appear to constrain management depending upon the needs of management. Sometimes these modifications are done by a single MEC bureaucrat via an MOU as opposed to MEMRAT.
3. The jury is WAY OUT on the whole prospect of whether any attempt by our union to force another union to lose jobs based on a contract that they didn't sign, would even be legal. It would certainly produce a DFR against ALPA by the agrieved RJ airline, and could well produce a lawsuit against DAL for violating the Railway Labor Act. This is competely unsettled law here. None of us are in any position to feel confident about the language that appears to force ANOTHER AIRLINE to reduce their RJ count or the block hours they fly those RJ's.
This is incredibly dangerous legal ground.
Carl
Item 2 above is nothing more than you pressing your donut agenda. yawn.
Item 3 is so out to lunch I have no idea where to begin.
Your ground is nothing but fearmongering.
05-25-2012, 12:26 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Ummm...because you're a condescending d!ck?
Carl
Carl
05-25-2012, 12:30 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by JobHopper
You missed the point. He's talking about DALPA's inability to draw a line in the sand. He's talking about our willingness to buy more and bigger airplanes for other airlines to fly. It's not about the numbers; it's about the spine.
But like Carl, I have my captain's seat. If you want to throw gear for a longer time.. vote no. It's all good either way.
05-25-2012, 12:38 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by PilotFrog
After just a couple of days of reading and exploring and what ifs, I've decided that the company wants this, and they will come back to the table quite quickly after we vote this down.
Personal opinion, but it seems that they can't wait 3 years, so the TVM argument is moot because it is something they need and for once we hold all the cards. The problem is what they need I am not sure we will ever agree to give ie more large RJs
Very interesting how the AT agreement with SWA works right in with the new DAL agreement with SWA. Transition of the AT 717s to SWA start in Jan of 2013, instead they start coming to us.
Then in 2015, when our contract finally catches up to 2012 SWA rates, the 717 rates at AT would snap to SWA 737 rates leaving our 717 drivers WAY behind what 717s SWA still has left.
Just be glad you aren't that first displaced AT 717 Capt.
Personal opinion, but it seems that they can't wait 3 years, so the TVM argument is moot because it is something they need and for once we hold all the cards. The problem is what they need I am not sure we will ever agree to give ie more large RJs
Very interesting how the AT agreement with SWA works right in with the new DAL agreement with SWA. Transition of the AT 717s to SWA start in Jan of 2013, instead they start coming to us.
Then in 2015, when our contract finally catches up to 2012 SWA rates, the 717 rates at AT would snap to SWA 737 rates leaving our 717 drivers WAY behind what 717s SWA still has left.
Just be glad you aren't that first displaced AT 717 Capt.
And the company will still have us in a BK contract. Why would they hurry? They always have plan B, and it doesn't necessarily include us. DYODD
05-25-2012, 12:40 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Easy. Vote NO on this TA, then start negotiating.
Carl
Carl
05-25-2012, 12:48 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Here it is:
1. Stop giving away MORE of our flying
2. Vote this TA down
3. Negotiate all NEW over 50 seat RJ's to be operated at Delta (even if it means some pilots will think they're on a B scale).
4. Understand that any alleged lease forgiveness of 50 seat RJ's based on buying new larger RJ's would not care who operated the aircraft...only that they are bought.
5. Wait until 2025 when the last older RJ burns its last Jet A.
6. Mainline flying fully recaptured.
But pay particular note of step 1 and 2.
Carl
1. Stop giving away MORE of our flying
2. Vote this TA down
3. Negotiate all NEW over 50 seat RJ's to be operated at Delta (even if it means some pilots will think they're on a B scale).
4. Understand that any alleged lease forgiveness of 50 seat RJ's based on buying new larger RJ's would not care who operated the aircraft...only that they are bought.
5. Wait until 2025 when the last older RJ burns its last Jet A.
6. Mainline flying fully recaptured.
But pay particular note of step 1 and 2.
Carl
But all you junior guys be sure to ignore item 3... Carl will still be at the top of the food chain, looking down at you with smug satisfaction knowing that you are working for him to keep his place on the throne, because we have all read his arguments about how difficult and productive the 747 is, and all that rot...
Items 4-6 will be so far out in the future that the youngest guy on the property will be a 330 captain by the time they hit "A scale" rates..
Unbelievable that any of you give him any quarter.
05-25-2012, 12:50 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Ragtop Day
What about the exception for 99,900 lb Delta Private Jets?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
