Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-18-2013 | 10:28 AM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
What dates are you trying to move, & what date did you tell it to cancel the transaction? I think you need to enter a process to 2359 on __ date that is no less then 72 hours prior to the day you're trying to move. IOW, if you were wanting to move 2/22 to 2/18 you would need to enter
22Feb-22Feb 18Feb-18Feb and tell it to cancel the request @ 2359 on 15Feb.
01-18-2013 | 11:07 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
I think I found it. It's located under "Negotiators Notepad 10-03 - LOA #22." However when I try to open it a message comes up saying "The resource you are looking for has been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable."
Anyone know where this info is now located?
Anyone know where this info is now located?
01-18-2013 | 11:09 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: A big one that looks like a little one
Buzz,
What dates are you trying to move, & what date did you tell it to cancel the transaction? I think you need to enter a process to 2359 on __ date that is no less then 72 hours prior to the day you're trying to move. IOW, if you were wanting to move 2/22 to 2/18 you would need to enter
22Feb-22Feb 18Feb-18Feb and tell it to cancel the request @ 2359 on 15Feb.
Since there are 3 separate months in next "month" you have to actually use the oft unused month box. I always thought that was a weird template until I couldn't get it to work...
01-18-2013 | 11:25 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
01-18-2013 | 11:50 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
Originally Posted by Delta MEC Communications
Pinnacle (9E) Update— The Pinnacle pilots approved their “Bridge Agreement” Tuesday. This means Delta will aid the carrier’s emergence from bankruptcy and 9E may become a wholly owned subsidiary of Delta Air Lines. The 9E “Bridge Agreement” does not apply to Delta pilot flying nor does it create a “flow up” program for 9E pilots. It does contain employment opportunities (“expedited process”) and fleet changes compliant with permitted aircraft types of our PWA. It is not a “flow” agreement. Delta’s objective hiring standards must be met and no individual 9E pilot is guaranteed a position at Delta. The MEC finds the agreement complies with the PWA, ALPA Admin Manual, and ALPA Constitution and By Laws. We continue to study this and all evolving and emerging transactions.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 01-18-2013 at 12:19 PM.
01-18-2013 | 12:06 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
From: 7ER Costar
I have my OE trip tomorrow with a deadhead only Saturday, then actual flying Sunday. I've already deviated the deadhead; do I have a "checkin" requirement for the deadhead leg or does just showing up and making the trip meet the checkin?
01-18-2013 | 12:06 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Hey Scambo. Thanks for the help. I actually called Alpa and they said it is located in scheduling alert 12-02 & 12-06. I'll check out the crew resources news as well. Thanks again.
01-18-2013 | 12:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: 7ERA
Just because the event does not violate the PWA nor does it violate the actual language of the C&BL, not does it violate AM Section 40, (scope was not changed and the DAL PWA still rules, per the Bridge Agreement) it does not preclude the MEC from coming to a consensus that they do not enjoy the fact that they were not informed nor part of the process. Maybe the understanding of the C&BL is not how the actual language reads.
Resolutions start the process of debating the issue at the local and then MEC level (If passed at the LEC level). I have read on here that you want the language changed to take out the ambiguity. When is your LEC meeting? Is your meeting before the MEC meeting where a passed local resolution will have the ability to be debated at the next Regular MEC meeting? (Feb 12-15) If so, write a resolution and get some debate of the issue at you LEC meeting.
If that does not seem like enough, use you ability to speak to the MEC during the MEC Meeting. Every pilot in good standing has the right.
01-18-2013 | 12:52 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Bar;
Just because the event does not violate the PWA nor does it violate the actual language of the C&BL, not does it violate AM Section 40, (scope was not changed and the DAL PWA still rules, per the Bridge Agreement) it does not preclude the MEC from coming to a consensus that they do not enjoy the fact that they were not informed nor part of the process. Maybe the understanding of the C&BL is not how the actual language reads.
Resolutions start the process of debating the issue at the local and then MEC level (If passed at the LEC level). I have read on here that you want the language changed to take out the ambiguity. When is your LEC meeting? Is your meeting before the MEC meeting where a passed local resolution will have the ability to be debated at the next Regular MEC meeting? (Feb 12-15) If so, write a resolution and get some debate of the issue at you LEC meeting.
If that does not seem like enough, use you ability to speak to the MEC during the MEC Meeting. Every pilot in good standing has the right.
Just because the event does not violate the PWA nor does it violate the actual language of the C&BL, not does it violate AM Section 40, (scope was not changed and the DAL PWA still rules, per the Bridge Agreement) it does not preclude the MEC from coming to a consensus that they do not enjoy the fact that they were not informed nor part of the process. Maybe the understanding of the C&BL is not how the actual language reads.
Resolutions start the process of debating the issue at the local and then MEC level (If passed at the LEC level). I have read on here that you want the language changed to take out the ambiguity. When is your LEC meeting? Is your meeting before the MEC meeting where a passed local resolution will have the ability to be debated at the next Regular MEC meeting? (Feb 12-15) If so, write a resolution and get some debate of the issue at you LEC meeting.
If that does not seem like enough, use you ability to speak to the MEC during the MEC Meeting. Every pilot in good standing has the right.
How did we reach a consensus without a meeting ?
Do we have unconfirmed contract admin making unilateral determinations on CBL matters ?
This "determination" before the MEC meeting in February preempts action the staff does not want.
The way I see it, the language exists in the Admin Manual. That language was ignored. Again using the speeder analogy:
WHEREAS the current law states the speed limit in the school zone is 25 MPH.
WHEREAS some drivers insist on doing 80
LET IT BE RESOVED the law will read: "The speed limit in the school zone is REALLY 25 MPH.
Same folks who refuse to enforce current language would be no more compelled to enforce any future language.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 01-18-2013 at 01:30 PM.
01-18-2013 | 12:55 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,831
Likes: 172
From: window seat
The CMR fleet agreement was signed by CMR management, not DAL management. If it were broken, the CMR pilots could only grieve it with CMR management, not DAL, regardless of their wholly owned status. Theoretically fleet counts could be maintained by flying for other airlines, or even an "Indy Air" or ExpressJet type of operation as well, but of course that never happened. Either way though, CMR pilots never "owned" any DAL flying directly with DAL management.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
