Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
12-16-2012 | 08:01 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
From: Short Bus FO
No idea about the pay, but the PTP is a 48 hour buffer before you start training. It was one of the options on the AE bid. On mine, the first day after PTP is just checking into the hotel, and actual training starts the next morning.
12-16-2012 | 08:14 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Great post. One more important point to add is this sets a precedent. This will be the first non-compliance issue with these JV agreements any group has faced. We are blazing new trails here and the company must abide by the agreement. If they do not abide by the agreement, MGT must know in no uncertain terms our cooperation is over with any and all agreements going forward. It should not be up for re-negotiation in any deal with VA.
The Company may feel our cooperation is not needed. They did not involve our pilot leadership before entering into this agreement with Virgin Atlantic.
The trend has been for Delta management to violate scope, then negotiate their way out of compliance.
IMHO we broke a trend line with C2012. Our scope recovery is probably saving us from furloughs. We must keep up that good work by enforcing our contract. Selling Delta pilot jobs is not on the table. It may take a lot more than "non cooperation with future endeavors." We will see.
As for me, I like lobbying our government on behalf of Delta and ALPA. Hopefully this will be resolved.
12-16-2012 | 08:54 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,876
Likes: 193
Sailing,
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
Your point is valid going forward. By the time the process runs its course the company will have had 4 plus years of non compliance. You can not impose retroactive flying. There has to be a penalty to the company for that time period.
12-16-2012 | 10:11 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
From: Retired, again...
Just curious...why did you delete my reply to Gunship Guy ??
Regards,
BG
12-16-2012 | 10:24 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Guess we will have to penalize them by getting them to invest in their own Company, if we can.
12-16-2012 | 10:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: A big one that looks like a little one
Did you tell her that 42% more than nothing was still nothing?
12-16-2012 | 10:40 AM
#WEDAT
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
From: 717a
It is good to see constructive discussion. The important thing you both bring up is contact your reps!! Make sure they know you want compliance.
12-16-2012 | 11:21 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
If we can get the new contract rammed through in record time via "constructive engagement," why should it take 4 years to end their contract non-compliance?
Is the "constructive engagement" less of a two-way street than it appears? Only when it suits them?
That being said I agree that compensation for the period of grievance is needed in addition to the ending of the non-compliance/violation. Compensation in exchange for allowing them to continue the violation with our agreement is the no-no.
12-16-2012 | 12:47 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: A big one that looks like a little one
If we can get the new contract rammed through in record time via "constructive engagement," why should it take 4 years to end their contract non-compliance?
Is the "constructive engagement" less of a two-way street than it appears? Only when it suits them?
That being said I agree that compensation for the period of grievance is needed in addition to the ending of the non-compliance/violation. Compensation in exchange for allowing them to continue the violation with our agreement is the no-no.
But as long as we all jump at the chance to email the government about transferring our Haneda slot, or swapping slots at LGA, but we have no interest in bashing down the company's door over a section 1 violation, then the company has no motivation to do anything differently
ALPA or not - 10,000 angry pilots would make for a productive direct relationship with the company. But since only 100 or so are probably troubled by this issue on a daily basis...
Guess the question is - what is our goal? I'd quote the SPC Chairman but it's probably something along the lines of "continue constructive engagement". That's not planning - that's pandering to the company and the majority of happy pilots at Delta.
12-16-2012 | 01:46 PM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
