|
|
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1354789)
Management and the union have both all but confirmed that they are not going to be in compliance with the contractual production balance. The question is what are we going to do about it?
That's a darn good question, and I sure hope DALPA holds DAL's feet to the fire on this... I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole. (Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...) But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that... |
Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
(Post 1354847)
That's a darn good question, and I sure hope DALPA holds DAL's feet to the fire on this...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole. (Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...) But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that... |
Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
(Post 1354847)
That's a darn good question, and I sure hope DALPA holds DAL's feet to the fire on this...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole. (Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...) But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that... I have come to the conclusion that the only way these deals will work out is if the penalty for non-compliance is spelled out ahead of time. A good example is pulling 6 seats out of the RJs is the company does XXXXX. It is spelled out in black and white and the company knows what will trigger it and they have avoided triggering it. Saying that we will play ball (whatever the issue is) now and in the future the company will do XXXXX seems to be a big failure. Because the company eventually may not do XXXX and we are left to ponder the consequences on a Web board. Now this issue is a lot more complicated than this - for instance a lot of what the company does, they can do without DALPA's blessing even though they would like to have the Pilots on-board. I get that - All I am asking for is that when we come to the agreements spell out the terms and consequences of non-compliance ahead of time. I have said DALPA does not have a great track record on this issue but at times they have fought hard and won - fighting the Force-Majeure and winning the no furlough clause fight after the Gulf War comes to mind. At other times they have been very unimpressive - Scope related issues comes to mind here. Scoop |
Originally Posted by Flamer
(Post 1354850)
8/4/3/3 comes to mind.
|
When PCS for MAR opens this week does the first run go in seniority order or first in que?
|
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1354867)
I have come to the conclusion that the only way these deals will work out is if the penalty for non-compliance is spelled out ahead of time.
A good example is pulling 6 seats out of the RJs is the company does XXXXX. It is spelled out in black and white and the company knows what will trigger it and they have avoided triggering it. Saying that we will play ball (whatever the issue is) now and in the future the company will do XXXXX seems to be a big failure. Because the company eventually may not do XXXX and we are left to ponder the consequences on a Web board. Now this issue is a lot more complicated than this - for instance a lot of what the company does, they can do without DALPA's blessing even though they would like to have the Pilots on-board. I get that - All I am asking for is that when we come to the agreements spell out the terms and consequences of non-compliance ahead of time. I have said DALPA does not have a great track record on this issue but at times they have fought hard and won - fighting the Force-Majeure and winning the no furlough clause fight after the Gulf War comes to mind. At other times they have been very unimpressive - Scope related issues comes to mind here. Scoop Although I can't speak personally to your last paragraph because I wasn't here. |
Look's like the rumored squabble with AS may have some credence. LAX-SEA is going to 1x 757, 1x 738, and 1xCR9... and MEM-SEA is returning for the summer with 1x A320.
|
Originally Posted by Mike Hancho
(Post 1354952)
When PCS for MAR opens this week does the first run go in seniority order or first in que?
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1355023)
Look's like the rumored squabble with AS may have some credence. LAX-SEA is going to 1x 757, 1x 738, and 1xCR9... and MEM-SEA is returning for the summer with 1x A320.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5179/5...25ab64ef_z.jpg is it like in the Matrix when Keanu Reeves bows up and the walls flex? |
What does "Use PF Keys" mean when trying to swap with pot?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:54 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands