georgetg

MEC was not consulted per my rep.

The newly added 35% ALPA hiring quota in our PWA suggest that Delta ALPA is specifically party to those types of decisions, after all it is in the PWA...

At issue here though is the fact that ALPA National inserted itself into a negotiation with Delta management contrary to the ALPA CBL. Negotiating with management is the exclusive function of each airlines MEC. ALPA National approves or dissapproves contracts but doesn't negotiate.

Essentially ALPA National via Lee Moak did an end run around our own union...that is a big deal and sets a terrible precedent.

Cheers
George

hockeypilot44

I am under the impression our union does not care.

lolwut

Delta Connection Pilots flying for Delta?

jabwmu

Exactly!!!

lolwut

I don't see what the big problem is. Delta Connection pilots are just baby Delta pilots. Why don't you all put on your big boy shoes and mentor them into the best Wind Checkers this industry has.

Rogue24

Time will tell on this, but ALPA National is the exclusive bargaining agent and autonomy is give to the local level via the ALPA CBL.

Ford-Cooksey requires any part that may be effected to be made aware at the National level of ALPA that the talks are taking place. Local Autonomy provides that the MEC of a given airline does the direct bargaining and that National Approves the local level to initiate it. Nationals check of the process is have the president sign the agreement.

If DALPA was made aware, and the reps were not = issue on the MEC level

If all of DALPA was made aware on the MEC level = no issue but we should sign it too

If DALPA were totally unaware = big issue.
The cure for this is to restart negotiations with DALPA at the table and come to a new agreement that allows local autonomy to remain intact and the C&BL to be followed. The fix is not that big of a deal, but the repercussions may be for those at National that did not follow the admin manual or the C&BL.

Wait and see what transpires, there may be nothing to this. Facts need to come out. The issues that many have on here are; some of the details of the bridge agreement but mostly a process issue. Lets see if the process was followed. If it was not our MEC is bound to rectify it.

iceman49

Where is the rest of the language?

Rogue24

The issues described have nothing to do with "those RJ pilots" its about process and protecting local autonomy. If Republic or another non-alpa carrier would have done this agreement without the concurrence of ALPA National the exclusivity language would be what would be used to stop it. Since it is a ALPA to ALPA represented pilot issue it comes down to local autonomy.

Many Delta pilots want to find ways to help DCI ALPA pilots, but they want the ALPA Constitution and By-laws as well as the Admin manual followed. Think if this was Virgin Atlantic (BALPA) and DAL. How do you think we would react? Probably much in the same way but the lines would be clearer drawn. Its about what this precedence sets not necessarily the terms of the deal. That is for the Delta MEC and their negotiators to decide.

Roadkill

Hi, no offense intended here but... are you a pilot? I'm always confused by your posts, and have gotten the impression you may not be a pilot... which is OK but since this forum is at "Airline Pilot Central", then I'd say most folks assume everyone on here is a pilot.
If you're NOT a pilot, I think it would be more helpful for folks reading your posts and interacting with you to understand them, AND more honest, for you to put something in your user-info on the left that would let folks know that. Position "Fool Proof" would be the spot to put Flt Attendant, or something like that.
You may not realize it, but allowing folks to assume you are, since you're on an Airline Pilot Forum, changes the context of everything you write, and slants it in many reader's minds as an attempt to deceive. I don't get that impression from reading your posts, but am still left with a final impression of someone trying to deceive me. For example, the judgement of a captain's skills based on how smooth a landing was from the back is completely different than such a statement from someone flying with him as a co-pilot--one of them has a valid opinion on "Piloting skills" and another only on "captaining skills".

Anyways, I enjoy your input here but so much of what you post sounds slightly off and, well, "not informed" that I've begun to wonder if you're a flt attendant, and your response would be appreciated to help me understand and enjoy your posts more.
Thanks! Merry Xmas etc.

georgetg

Rogue you get it, the precedence and how this might be used with bigger fish is the issue here!

Cheers
George