|
|
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1331278)
What recourse do you recommend now? Do you want to put your hands in delta hiring practices and make them contractual? Serious questions that need to be asked of the group and then directed to the reps via resolution before the February MEC meeting.
Failing that, resolutions have been put forward. I've got at least one going forward next month. |
Originally Posted by SailorJerry
(Post 1331274)
What evidence do you have that it wasn't intentional?
Originally Posted by SailorJerry
(Post 1331274)
Any business expert would tell you that critical information is going to get overlooked if it's disseminated just before a major holiday. Couple that with the rep changeover, and we have legitimate grounds for a black helicopter conspiracy.
The thing is, there are new reps coming along all the time. What makes this time special? No offense to anyone, but I don't see Perry Mason or Sherlock Holmes amongst the incoming cadre. I see people that cared enough to get involved and put their name out there and got the votes to get elected. Hats off to them. But is the union going to be a drastically different entity for the bankruptcy courts to deal with once a couple reps change over? I doubt it. So why would they bother jumping through hoops to manipulate a timeline. More likely the timeline is dictated by Delta needing to know who is going to be providing domestic feed to their hubs during this coming spring/summer travel season. If PCL was not going to survive, DAL probably needed to know soon.
Originally Posted by SailorJerry
(Post 1331274)
Although its more plausible that the timeline merely jived with a pre-scheduled court date.
"Occam's Razor". |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1331288)
Nothing like being launch customers.
JALs grounded now too. So... Will UA follow suit? This puts a lot of pressure on Boeing, might this be a good opportunity to snag some 777's or 748's for crazy Eddie prices? ---just dreaming of course |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1331294)
Thus far, web board sources have been much more accurate sources of objective information than status reps who were locked out of the room while another pilot group came in and did a deal with Delta management.
We need a primary level program to educate Status Reps on the basics of grass roots representation. How the representational structure of ALPA works and how attorneys work to represent their clients. I've heard we have one Rep who came on to a web board and made false allegations designed to demean the character of one of the pilots he is responsible for protecting. If true, I'd say that guy does not really understand what "representation" means. |
Originally Posted by SailorJerry
(Post 1331298)
First off I've swapped a handful of emails with my rep on this issue. It wasn't put on an agenda until later this month, and at the MEC meeting next month. Recourse? We can grieve it. It was the MEC admin's decision to delay interest in it. I think a resolution should be passed that its the MEC's suggestion that no preference be given to the PNCL candidates during the interview. We don't have to have a hand in it, but we're certainly entitled to an opinion, aren't we?
Pass a resolution that directs the MEC to direct the negotiating committee to negotiate with delta to violate a agreement they just signed? Probability of that happening and getting delta to agree to it? Zero There's nothing sarcastical about my concern over this issue. My point is, is that if they expended negotiating capital on the Bridge Agreement, and it proves to be of little value, they're gonna be angry and may seek grievance based action against Delta. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1331276)
Your recall is incorrect.
I understood the issues in the RJDC problem, just as I understand the issues in Delta's current representational problem. Litigation against our union has never been the answer. The Ford, Cooksey litigation obtained class status (if I am not mistaken). Unless members of the class opted out, then they were included in the class. Some pilots asked to be removed. I was among those removed. All this is recorded in the documents relating to the lawsuit. So, do I understand that you DID support their position but did NOT support taking it to court? I wasn't aware of the subtlety. And if you opted out of the class, does it follow you did not send them money? I'm just trying to understand where you were at on that issue because if you agreed with the premise of Ford & Cooksey's complaint then it seems your perspective is different now. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1331268)
The military guys probably do not get the angst the civilians are feeling about the affirmative action program for entitled Pinnacle pilots. For the guys who served, sent their resumes to five airlines and went with the first who hired them, let me ' splain.
Most of the civilian pilots paid a huge amount of money to obtain a college degree and obtain the number of hours to make them competitive in the job market. Avoiding college would have meant getting to Delta perhaps five, or six, years earlier (if Delta were hiring). Throw in the post 9/11 interruption, the result of going to college was getting hired in 2009 instead of 1999. Getting to Delta was a 20 year path for my friends. Some friends are still completing the requirements. To have those requirements suddenly change because some f-NWA manager sees an opening to cut regional pay a little is no small let down for those who have put in their time in the school house and delayed their flying career to do so. The way I read the bridge agreement, the max number of Pinnacle pilots that Delta is required to hire is 144 for 2013-2016 (it can go down if hiring is low). 144. Per year. Gack, there goes the neighborhood, hide the women and children. As for angst, picture yourself leading a night four ship to a tanker and your ejection seat catches on fire at the same time the roll stab aug and yaw stab aug have catastrophic failures leading to random full scale deflection of flight controls. Like so hard your clear visor gets cracked on the canopy followed by your noggin. There is some major league angst my friend. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1331314)
Pass a resolution that directs the MEC to direct the negotiating committee to negotiate with delta to violate a agreement they just signed? Probability of that happening and getting delta to agree to it? Zero
There's nothing sarcastical about my concern over this issue. My point is, is that if they expended negotiating capital on the Bridge Agreement, and it proves to be of little value, they're gonna be angry and may seek grievance based action against Delta. If there's negotiating history that indicated Delta intended to hire Pinnacle pilots at a given success ratio, they have a grievance. We have no grievance. You're doing that typical ALPA guy thing where you put words in my mouth. There was no harm to Delta pilots - only to Pinnacle pilots. We have no grounds for a grievance, but we can certainly indicate our distaste through a resolution delivered to the DAL Board of Directors via certified mail. At least that way we have something to show for ourselves if this thing backfires. There's nothing more powerful than an "I told you so". |
Originally Posted by hornetsnest
(Post 1331317)
Thanks for the (semi)clarification.
So, do I understand that you DID support their position but did NOT support taking it to court? I wasn't aware of the subtlety. And if you opted out of the class, does it follow you did not send them money? I'm just trying to understand where you were at on that issue because if you agreed with the premise of Ford & Cooksey's complaint then it seems your perspective is different now. My opinions are clearly stated in the documents which govern the proper conduct of our union. I've only expected the Officers who have the duty to their members to faithfully and honestly serve the members of our association. What became the Ford / Cooksey litigation should have been addressed by a hearing board and resolved without litigation. |
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
(Post 1331320)
As for angst, picture yourself leading a night four ship to a tanker and your ejection seat catches on fire at the same time the roll stab aug and yaw stab aug have catastrophic failures leading to random full scale deflection of flight controls. Like so hard your clear visor gets cracked on the canopy followed by your noggin. There is some major league angst my friend.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:38 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands