It's always personal when people lie. Stop doing it if you don't like being called out over it.

LEC reps say that this TA is cost neutral. They further state the MEC members are too invested in this TA to describe it objectively.

Carl

Keyboard Kommando Karl,

Can you stay on topic, or has your advanced age limited your mental faculties?

Tell me what I have lied about. The post was in reference to costing, remember old man?

Oh, show me where I said anything about cost neutral other than how that can be good for pilots. 1234 has a post you've failed to answer in relation to your assertions on cost neutral...

This is what I responded to Carl.

[QUOTE=1234;1198917]I am sorry Carl but please explain to me how your $50/ hr raise and $40,000 + per year dc is being taken out of your other pocket?[/QUOTE

Carl currently gets 1% DC and 2% DPSP, another 1% DC on 1/1/13 than another 13% on 1/1/14.

OK, let's start from the beginning. Here is what I posted:

Now here is what you said I said:

Where in my post do I "accuse" junior pilots of voting YES? Where do I state that they "will" vote YES?

You read into my post something that wasn't there. The conventional wisdom here has been for quite some time that the top half of the list only cares about pay, and only the bottom half of the list cares about scope. While too broad a brush to paint with, that is probably true in a broad sense. That's why I've been saying for months that IF we are to be saved from another scope giveaway, it will only be because the bottom half of the list saved us. Consequently, if a scope cave-in got voted in, it will have been because the bottom half of the list (junior guys) voted YES. That's not my opinion, it's math. If the junior guys vote in lock step to save scope, the senior guys can't stop it with their YES votes. That was and is my only point.

Now for you to piggy back on this post of mine as your excuse for your demeaning post about military pilots, is not appreciated by me. You apologized, and you should have. But don't pull me into this.

Carl

What is your point? He also has a frozen pension at pre bk rates and in 2014 will be getting over $40k to his dc.

It may be ugly but do we care if it's cost neutral to the company? If they're taking it from somewhere else and putting it in our pocket, I'm fine with that.

This is a point I have made before, so much of the hidden cost of outsourcing large RJs cannot be accounted for but is coming directly from Delta's bottom line. ALPA (as of the last few months) claims the Delta has shown them the internal numbers that show mainline can't fly CRJ-900s profitably but given how they like to "hold these numbers close to their chest" I have to wonder if the numbers Delta "shared" with DALPA were not spun just a little.

In all honesty ALPA should not be relying on management's numbers.

You seem to think that when I said you lied, it was name calling. It wasn't. It was a statement of fact. And no amount of name calling (above being just your latest example) will deflect from the fact that you lied. Our LEC reps did NOT "misread" or "mishear" as you stated they did. They looked at the same costing data you did and reached the conclusion that this is a cost neutral TA to Delta Air Lines. Almost as if there were psychic, they then warned us that the MEC (and its unelected bureaucrats like you) are too heavily invested in this TA to be able to describe it objectively. You continue to prove them right.

Again, your argument is not with me, it's with the reps. And I am very thankful for mine right now. Without their very courageous votes even in the face of the smear campaign that has already begun against them, we'd be on our way to a sure bet steamrolling. At least now, we have a small chance.

Carl

One of the advantages of working for a large union is that your E&FA department gets to look at 37 different airlines and their internal numbers. While they are bound by confidentiality agreements they can quickly tell which carriers are out of the norm. ALPA also has copies of all the DCI (and many other regionals)ASA agreements and can match the numbers from the agreements with data provided by management. Lastly, most of the regionals are publicly traded companies (Trans States excepted) and have SEC reporting requirements. Those are yet another crosscheck.

In all honesty ALPA doesn't rely just on management's numbers.