Unfortunately, the company's impending violation will occur in conjunction with the next Section 6 negotiations.

Now we know why the company agreed to (or perhaps insisted on?) a 3-year contract length.

The pattern is well established:
- the company will throw us a couple of bucks to lower the JV percentage.

- DALPA will sell it hard ("time value of money" or whatever slogan they come up with). 60% will panic and vote "yes."

- A few months later, it will become apparent that in addition to ceding scope, we also ****ed away a significant amount of QOL.

- Rinse, wash, and repeat in a few more years.

 

How many pilots do you guys have @ LAX?

 

Not much. I think we may be the smallest base. CVG might be close though. 130 or so on the 73. I'm guessing 350 or so on the 76 without looking at the list.

 

In case anyone had any illusions about whether Delta takes full advantage of all contract changes in their favor...
Check out alllll the redeyes that used to report at 2230, which now report at 23:30 to avoid the extra day of pay. Not a single one of these existed before...

When folks say, "Delta won't take advantage of ALV+15, that's just for international...", look at this picture.
This is a PERFECT image of what Delta WILL do when our contract allows it-- take 100% full advantage of it.

Here's 18 trips in open time, all of them there because how incredibly heinous they pay, that are called "2 day trips" but are really 3 days, or are called "3 day" but are really 4 days, because you report the day prior. And with 50%ish commuters, that means a FULL day of efforts uncompensated really, because flying a redeye at 0030 means you DIDN'T do whatever you wanted the day prior to this trip. Of course all the redeyes in my category have been rebuilt to depart just late enough to not pay for each day....

 

Thank you. I was hoping someone would say it. Unfortunately, I can't see those in DALPA who make decisions on how to go forward thinking in this manner.

 

Oh, and underboob.



Free (pardon) Jesse.

 

The only solution to a scope violation is forcing them to comply with the language they signed. Anything else is justifying the loss of our jobs by accepting some quid. This is exactly what the young folks that come on here mean when they say we're selling our futures for money. In the Atlantic, they have three choices: Force the JV partners to fly less, fly Delta more, or cancel the JV. I'd prefer a cancel. In the pacific, they have two choices: keep the exact same number of flights to NRT, or cancel the JV. I'd prefer a cancel. No amount of money or "other improvements" can EVER be tied to our scope. We can't sell our jobs.

Think of it like fuel. Say fuel allocations were totally government controlled. And we had a signed deal allocating us X number of gallons per year. Then we get to December and we're told our remaining allocation has been forever given to Southwest. We sue the government, and they offer us a monetary settlement equal to the amount of fuel we were going to be shorted forever. Do you take the money? Or do you realize that without fuel, we have no airline. And if they do this 12 more times, we might have 12 more checks, but no more fuel to operate. The only answer is to accept no settlement other than our full allocation of fuel...because fuel is an airline's life blood. Likewise, jobs are a union's life blood.

Sorry for the rant. Does that make any sense?

Carl

 

I know you're in SLC Roadkill, but welcome to the world that is LAX. We've been *****ing about this for years. And you are right, the company knows exactly what they are doing.

 

Oh, absolutely we should force them to comply with all the provisions of our contract. I was not advocating to sell scope in the slightest. I guess I wasn't clear. I will try to be more so.

Take the current situation with the TAJV. Assume this (I know it will be hard Carl): The noncompliance is grieved and won and the company is forced to comply. If money is not an adequate compensation for the violation............what is? That was the point of my question.

Denny

 

Not saying that this is not happening, but I believe even if they kept the report at 2230 it would not matter - the exclusion period starts at 2200.

From a C-2012 Bulletin:

Introduced a new rig – Average Daily Guarantee
– Provides for a daily average of 4:30 to a rotation. This addresses the issue, for example, of a three day trip with only two duty periods.
– Exception for rotations that have a duty period reporting after 2200 or releasing prior to 0200 pilot base time



Scoop