Originally Posted by Timbo

Here's something I've been thinking about ever since the "Early Contract, Golden Opportunity", you know, the one where Richard traded us 4833 with upcoming record profits, in exchange for the 717's and parking the 50 seat RJ's, ie. all of which was going to happen regardless...

What If...

Richard is going to now trade DALPA the much fabled Wide Body Order, for JVTA and NRT Slot relief?

It'll sound something like this:

Hey guys, Richard says we can't make money flying X, Y and Z...but if we give him Scope Relief (again) he will order 12 more A330's, to fly A, B and C!!

Hoo Ray! It's Win Win! Again!

Seems to me that Richard has never wasted an opportunity to trade the corporate long term plans to DALPA, in exchange for more scope relief.

I mean heck, if they are going to do it anyway, why not tell DALPA the whole deal rests ON THEM capitulating...something, right?

What's the worst that could happen?

Has DALPA ever said NO to...anything Richard threw at them?

So, I expect we will give all the JVTA and NRT slot relief necessary, and as soon as we do, Richard will announce the Wide Body Order.... Just don't be surprised when you find out this big Wide Body Order is really 767ER replacement jets, something they were going to have to do anyway.

Originally Posted by Timbo

Here's something I've been thinking about ever since the "Early Contract, Golden Opportunity", you know, the one where Richard traded us 4833 with upcoming record profits, in exchange for the 717's and parking the 50 seat RJ's, ie. all of which was going to happen regardless...

What If...

Richard is going to now trade DALPA the much fabled Wide Body Order, for JVTA and NRT Slot relief?

It'll sound something like this:

Hey guys, Richard says we can't make money flying X, Y and Z...but if we give him Scope Relief (again) he will order 12 more A330's, to fly A, B and C!!

Hoo Ray! It's Win Win! Again!

Seems to me that Richard has never wasted an opportunity to trade the corporate long term plans to DALPA, in exchange for more scope relief.

I mean heck, if they are going to do it anyway, why not tell DALPA the whole deal rests ON THEM capitulating...something, right?

What's the worst that could happen?

Has DALPA ever said NO to...anything Richard threw at them?

So, I expect we will give all the JVTA and NRT slot relief necessary, and as soon as we do, Richard will announce the Wide Body Order.... Just don't be surprised when you find out this big Wide Body Order is really 767ER replacement jets, something they were going to have to do anyway.

Originally Posted by Timbo

Carl, you've got it. That's why the Lawyers always leave loopholes.

It's their job protection, because they'll have to come back and close those loopholes! (and open new ones)

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

In my previous post, I used the term Atlantic to mean the TAJV. This is the JV that will be way out of compliance by the measuring date of March 2014. If we win the grievance (and there's no way to lose unless DALPA purposely loses it for strategic reasons), then forcing them to comply means just that. They can comply in three ways: 1. Fly more Atlantic stuff with Delta pilots. 2. Force the partners to reduce their Atlantic flying. 3. Cancel the JV. There is no fourth choice of compensatory damages. Comply means comply. If we allow anything else, we set the precedence of rendering ratios and percentages meaningless in any JV or code share.

What am I missing here Denny?

Carl

Originally Posted by Timbo

Here's something I've been thinking about ever since the "Early Contract, Golden Opportunity", you know, the one where Richard traded us 4833 with upcoming record profits, in exchange for the 717's and parking the 50 seat RJ's, ie. all of which was going to happen regardless...

What If...

Richard is going to now trade DALPA the much fabled Wide Body Order, for JVTA and NRT Slot relief?

It'll sound something like this:

Hey guys, Richard says we can't make money flying X, Y and Z...but if we give him Scope Relief (again) he will order 12 more A330's, to fly A, B and C!!

Hoo Ray! It's Win Win! Again!

Seems to me that Richard has never wasted an opportunity to trade the corporate long term plans to DALPA, in exchange for more scope relief.

I mean heck, if they are going to do it anyway, why not tell DALPA the whole deal rests ON THEM capitulating...something, right?

What's the worst that could happen?

Has DALPA ever said NO to...anything Richard threw at them?

So, I expect we will give all the JVTA and NRT slot relief necessary, and as soon as we do, Richard will announce the Wide Body Order.... Just don't be surprised when you find out this big Wide Body Order is really 767ER replacement jets, something they were going to have to do anyway.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

I think there needs to be one more thing added to your scenario above. DALPA will claim our language was so weak that the legal experts at ALPA said we had almost no chance of winning the grievance. So at least we got the wide body order in exchange PLUS new iron clad language to prevent this from ever happening again.

Fast forward to DALPA's response when new wide bodies replace existing ones: "Stop being so negative about everything". And DALPA's response to the next violation and iron clad language portrayed as indefensible: Shut up you Carl-loving ALPA-hater.

Carl

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Now I'm with you. I knew I was missing your main point.

Unfortunately, the way I read our JV language, I don't think we have a strong case for receiving any compensatory damages for flying lost prior to the measurement date of March 2014. The arbitrator would likely only give us a fix going forward.

I do think there is a case to be made for it but when a company cries "economics," I think judges/arbitrators are loathe to give compensatory damages. But in this case, with the company making boatloads of money, I would definitely want the Union to vigorously pursue some kind of compensation for lost flying. Whether it is awarded is beside the point.

This totally depends on how ALPA allows DALPA to fight this grievance. Any and all funds/legal assets would come from ALPA national. One choice of ALPA's would be to negotiate it away directly with management without any DALPA input.

This would absolutely pave the way for DPA. Even I would send in a card then! I really don't see Alpa national doing anything about our scope without Dalpa. I know you will say "but what about Pinnacle?" Yes, we should have been in the room for that negotiation but it probably would have been just as observers anyway. I think this would be totally different in that it has to do with the MAJOR section of our contract.

Another would be for DALPA to purposely put forth an extremely weak case and try to lose in exchange for a strategic promise from management. Yet another possibility is for DALPA to claim our language is too weak to even grieve (like the RAH scope abuse).

Highly unlikely but possible. I would think EVERYONE knows "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" so to speak. This also ties in with my response above.

In order to win this, we would need a strong response from ALPA national showing anger at the number of jobs lost by Delta pilots and commit the full legal resources of national to defend the language and accept nothing other than full compliance immediately. It will also require DALPA forcing management to do something they absolutely don't want to do. What do you think our chances are of getting these responses from ALPA/DALPA?

Well, if my current reps are any indication, I would say pretty good. But we are talking a year and 9 months down the road with the 3 year measurement period ending 3/31/14 and then a year to get back in compliance 3/31/15. (Eerily close to our next contract openers, I'd say within 5 to 10 days.)

Carl

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

Thank you, both Denny and Carl. All good points.