Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Also using smart phones, ipads, laptops and home computers. The union (who very well may have been duped themselves with slick talking Mr. Campbell) can't say things without having it fact checked in almost real time.

I know I'll never be on the cover of GQ, but can somebody get this guy a friggin orthodontist!

http://news.delta.com/file.php/1278/Campbell_hr.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Bauer (Post 1198120)

The phonies that continue to sell a leaky contract as it is being exposed to be should be ashamed of themselves.

More than that Jack, they need to start understanding that people are taking names. There's still time for them to realize they're too close to their "baby" and missed a few things. If they admit their error and pledge to do better, they might be saveable. If not they better like line flying or that next occupation they have lined up.

Carl

whitt767

05-26-2012 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1198131)

Japan had just concluded a peaceful negotiation with the United States when they bombed Pearl Harbor.

You can choose to believe whatever you want, but you poison the (reasoning) pool if you put your hope and theory out there as fact.

This isn't an arguement between you and me and we can't solve it. If you choose to hope one way, that's fine. I choose to have a legally enforceable guarantee before I believe the pilots are staying at SWA.

Gotcha. A theory, by definition is not fact, its just a set of statements or principles used to explain a group of facts or phenomena. If you think it is fact, then that is your problem. Poison? Nope.. Just use logic, and make your own decision. I'm still on the fence. Seriously.

slowplay

05-26-2012 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1198136)

Our CURRENT contract puts them in a hell of a position. With our hard 255 cap on large RJ's, their only alternative is to invest (via maintenance, re-engining) in a money losing and dying airframe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1198136)

Despite what our MEC salesman are saying, Delta WILL renegotiate this deal if we say NO. Guaranteed.
Carl

I've copied this for posterity. I like it when you guarantee me things.

When is the renegotiation guarantee redeemable? And I'm sure the renegotiated deal (including time value) will be far better in all respects than this one, right? You're going to put that in writing and have some personal accountability for that too...?:D

Elvis90

05-26-2012 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgetg (Post 1198101)

Nothing. Brian Bedford is planning on doing just that.

Even better, the TA gives Republic a specific exemption to perform large jet flying by exempting Chautaqua and Shuttle America (wholly owned subsidiaries of Republic) to be exempt from the improved holding company language:

Summary:

Our PWA has language to prohibit a DCI carrier to fly large jets.
Republic aquires Frontier and operates A320s, orders the C-Series.
Many Delta pilot call their reps and say it violates the PWA.
The DALPA lawyer responds that the PWA language isn't enforceable as written.
My rep promises to make sure the next contract is better.
New language in TA prohibits operations like Republic from operating larger jets.
Exemption added to TA specifically permits Republic (Chautaqua, Shuttle America) to operate large jets contrary to news language.

Really? This alone in context of BBs plans should be a NO vote!

Cheers
George

I just want to say I love the information age. This will be the first contract in history vetted under the watchful eyes of 12,000 plus pilots using google to refresh everyone's memory of who is intending to do what, what past leaders said/mistakes made.

Also using smart phones, ipads, laptops and home computers. The union (who very well may have been duped themselves with slick talking Mr. Campbell) can't say things without having it fact checked in almost real time. The phonies that continue to sell a leaky contract as it is being exposed to be should be ashamed of themselves.

Technology in the information age is a game changer!

slowplay

05-26-2012 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1198151)

IMO, it furthers the whipsaw, but in the case of RAH, it affects regionals AND mainline equally.

How?

Where's the money/business deal in that?

Pineapple Guy

05-26-2012 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1198123)

Another bet from a known welcher?:D

Fool me once and all...

I knew that would be your response. You're too predictable, scambo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1198123)

But PG, I am glad you are back on this forum, and I'm also glad to see that you interacted with those pesky 130 seat SWA guys making $200,000-$350,000 per year.

This too. When you want to have a serious discussion, let me know and I'll re-engage. Until then, I'll go back to lurking.

scambo1

05-26-2012 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1198158)

Not exactly. You are a master of taking words out of context, building strawmen and running in full tilt mode, Don Quixote.

Delta has other options. They are slower and have more risk. But Delta is doing a math problem. When the math doesn't work on this path, they move to another one.

I've copied this for posterity. I like it when you guarantee me things.

When is the renegotiation guarantee redeemable? And I'm sure the renegotiated deal (including time value) will be far better in all respects than this one, right? You're going to put that in writing and have some personal accountability for that too...?:D

What's the time value of "cost neutral" for three more years?

scambo1

05-26-2012 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1198162)

I knew that would be your response. You're too predictable, scambo.

This too. When you want to have a serious discussion, let me know and I'll re-engage. Until then, I'll go back to lurking.

Aw c'mon PG...I've got popsicles.

Carl Spackler

05-26-2012 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1234 (Post 1198125)

I will admit that I do not know what the policy is regarding negotiations and TA's, but I guess that I really don't understand the complaint that the negotiators reach a TA before MEC approval. Wouldn't that always be the case. At some point the negotiating committee has a deal that they think is finished and will then present it to the MEC for their approval. At some point both sides say that they are finished negotiating pending approval form their bosses (MEC/exec). What am I missing?

That's a great question, and here's the answer. If negotiations are on track to meet the MEC's direction, then there isn't necessarily a need to brief the MEC...althought it's always done anyway from my experience. But in THIS case, it was very clear to the negotiators that management was playing hardball and would not meet the directives of the MEC. At THAT point, it was incumbent upon the NC to ask for a meeting of the full MEC to discuss what should be done. Our DTW LEC chairman said quite clearly that was NOT done. The NC just shook hands on the TA, leaviing the heavy lifting to the full MEC after the handshake. It was an amateurish mistake...unless the MEC chairman knew it all along and WANTED to put the LEC members in a no-win situation.

Mr. O'Malley has some very hard questions to answer about how this process was handled. It's HIS administration. The buck stops with him. IMO, it was classic Lee Moak behavior and an epic fail on his part.

Carl

Elvis90

05-26-2012 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1198093)

Ahh, I think I get it now.

The DCI refleeting option is a less expensive option than eating the sunk costs, engine maintenance and aircraft overhaul expense associated with management's option of going without us. That was the opportunity that created this deal.

Excellent! Slowly but surely, the truth is coming out here. Just as I've been saying, the "opportunity" was the company's huge desire to get out from under our CURRENT contract. Ergo, we have significant leverage...if we understand how much our CURRENT contract is damaging Delta. Ironically, they are now against the very contract items they fought so hard to insert. There RJ dream has turned into a nightmare, and we are being asked to save their experiment from death, by further gutting our conract. Such a deal I have for you!!

Our CURRENT contract puts them in a hell of a position. With our hard 255 cap on large RJ's, their only alternative is to invest (via maintenance, re-engining) in a money losing and dying airframe. Again, who has the leverage?

Despite what our MEC salesman are saying, Delta WILL renegotiate this deal if we say NO. Guaranteed. The SEA S/T has it right however when he states how personally and professionally invested our MEC is in THIS product. It is impossible for them to be objective now. Understand that with the road shows, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1198093)

Delta will invest in DCI one way or another,

Then let them. And let them explain that to the board and shareholders. I'll wait.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1198093)

the question is whether or not Delta pilots will benefit from that investment.

That's already been answered by the LEC NO votes. Delta pilots willl not benefit from that investment with this TA.

Carl

I agree with Carl...all good points. Put your corporate management hats on and look at it from the other side.

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:47 PM.

Page 10162 of 20174

« First