Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1645217)

The argument given by one of the Los Angeles reps for not having Memrat was that it would be logistically to difficult to and time consuming to explain the information behind months of nuanced negotiations. Furthermore, he stated that a pilot vote would likely be emotionally driven vs. thoughtful consideration of an analysis of the facts.

Well hell, you could make that argument about any memrat. Should we just give it up for good? :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver (Post 1645290)

Yes, FAR 117 is science based which is why it contains the requirement to have a minimum 10 hour rest, including the opportunity to get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. Do you think the pilots are sleeping 8 hours during the day and then flying the CDO?

Just because it's "legal" (surely, you have to agree this is a loophole... a way of getting around the FAR) doesn't mean it's safe.

The FAR requires an opportunity to get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. It doesn't require you to get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. I used to do CDOs all the time and never had a problem being rested. I slept during the day and used my time in the hotel to do the things I would normally do on my layovers. Yes, it requires discipline to make sure you are rested, but it's really not that difficult. By the same token, I could squander my 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep opportunity on a traditional layover by catching up on work for my small business, filing my toenails, or buying PPV movies on the hotel TV.

I don't agree at all that CDOs/Split duty periods are a "loophole" for getting around the FAR. They're specifically addressed in the FAR.

Good luck taking the stand that you can't in good conscience sign the release stating you are rested anytime you're assigned a CDO. I don't sleep well early in the evenings and despise early AM showtimes, but I'm not ready to Press to Test the "not rested" card any time one shows up on my schedule.

Sorry. Working non-traditional hours kind of come with the job, in my opinion. If you're given a legal rest opportunity and choose not to use it wisely, it's not the fault of the FAR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1645170)

Thanks for your leadership.

I didn't realize that I was expected provide leadership. Isn't that what our reps are for?

Quote:

Originally Posted by XtremeF150 (Post 1645330)

I might be ok with the CDO's if they CAN'T be given to those who bid around them. Make them an option for pilots to bid. Then those that can't get there needed sleep with this type flying can bid around them. Not really fair to allow them then realize guys don't necessarily like them and they fall on the junior guys.

Justifying these things by saying "well they are equally evil to other trips we already fly" is not a good idea. We need to be cleaning out problem areas not allowing more. I mean we already have RJ's so why not just allow more right. Or take out all the condo's in the wide body fleet. I mean some of our guys don't get that option right? Lets think about this

Also no one is addressing the staffing impact. I hope we take a hard look at allowing ourselves to become more efficient for the company.

The other stuff seems to sound good. Just hoping we aren't trading anything when we should be making outright gains.

My thoughts exactly as I was reading comments saying "well such and such is pretty miserable for getting proper rest...this is no worse than those." That logic is seriously flawed. I did CDO's in a previous life on reserve, not by choice. Felt the fatigue affects sometimes more than a week later, especially after doing a few in a row. It's a huge compromise to safety and everything that ALPA purports to stand for.

I will say this again, if our union ever wants the type of solidarity they ask us to get behind, then they need to allow the pilot membership to vote for or against contract changes that are this significant. Sorry, the argument that we already had our say by voting in those we trust is not good enough. There may not be any candidates running that truly represent the majority of what the average line pilots want.

Getting into the inner circle at the top is as much politicking as it is membership votes as we saw from the testimony during the recall. I support our union and I am all for unity but if they do not allow memrat for critical contract changes that can effect fatigue in a negative way all bets are off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1645358)

You're thinking of a system like US or 9E has where there is all short call on the lines. We don't operate like that at DL. You are on long call and can be converted to short call up to 6 times a month (7 in high ALV months).

We have a new line type starting next month called the CNO line(mixed SDT's with late night short call reserve), simply because the normal reserve system couldn't cover the SDT trips. If they are offering SDT's with an LOA, my bet is they have some type of reserve rule change in there as well.

fwiw as a salty line guy, I'll fly the CDOs. It's my kind of flying anyways but that's after I look over the numbers and see if its worth it. Do you lose per diem with CDOs or does the fact it was two calendar days matter? Would you work less because of them? Is the credit time worth it? On the surface it doesn't look like it.

And most importantly, is it a reduction in staffing? and I don't care if "we make it up in another part", if this alone reduces staffing then why compromise on it and allow it at all?

Still will wait for it to come out of the closet first. Now like I said that's my kind of flying to begin with, but, I may be the oddity and I could see where there is enough people who would want to do it. It may be a very bad idea.

Just because we have something that is bad "Lima" doesn't mean we it is OK or good to Add something else that is bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit (Post 1645276)

I hope you elected intelligent and thoughtful reps then... or maybe you should have run and been elected yourself to make sure that the majority of pilots thinks like you do and would get behind your philosophy.

There are several reasons why it was given to the reps, and most, if not all of them are good!

You haven't seen it so how do you know any of it is a concession? Listen, we all know you want everything yesterday... I want everything too, but as the old saying goes: "how do you eat an elephant?" "One bite at a time."

We've been eating a lot more frequently than any of our peers in the last 7 years, and I expect this LOA will be no different, or else I expect my reps to turn it down.

I don't need MEMRAT to secure a good deal, we have elected 19 extremely diverse pilots to weigh the merits. If they like the agreement, great..if they don't, that's fine also.

If they debate and decide the pilots would slam dunk a "Yes", why bother with the union expense (20-40k) and delayed implementation of the benefits of the agreement?

If they decide that it is worthy of a MEMRAT and an additional Monty's wait, then that's ok too. They are good people who were chosen by their peers to act on our behalf.

Don't like your reps ability to make thoughtful, logical, rational decisions in the best interest of ALL Delta pilots?

Well you should have acted a long time ago to rectify it, especially if people have the same heartburn you have with the current reps in your base. Maybe you're just in the minority, it happens...

I long winded reply that does not answer the crux of my previous post. Basically the shiznit Modus Operandi.

I had said:

In conclusion, ratifying a TA without Memrat that contains concessionary language, language that significantly alters OUR pilot working agreement, or contains conditional, restrictive or exclusionary language for ADG's, duty rigs and other pay events will have severe implications for our union representatives at all levels.

So let's make this simple. A yes or no answer will suffice.

Shiznit, do you believe that MEC ratification of an LOA that contains significant changes to multiple sections of our pilot working agreement, or, contains concessionary items including but not limited to CDO's, conditional, restrictive or exclusionary language for ADG's, duty rigs or other pay events, is an appropriate and acceptable practice without membership ratification.

Again. Yes or no will be sufficient.

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1645369)

And most importantly, is it a reduction in staffing and I don't care if "we make it up in another part"? If this alone reduces staffing then why compromise on it and allow it at all.

I'm with you regarding productivity/staffing. There have been many give-aways in productivity these past several years which reduce staffing needs. Every time this happens it slows the natural upward progression of seniority critical to increasing QOL, pay and flexibility available to Delta pilots.

Considering the company is on track to make a very large amount of money this year (while spending billions on stock buy-backs and handing money out to the shareholders), it's time to reverse that trend. It's time to reign in the giveaway and horse trading mentality left over from the days of bankruptcy.

Now is the time we have been waiting a decade for to finally improve QOL and pay. If we can't do it now, it will never happen. Also, as someone said earlier, if we give up work rules for pay, the pay always gets taken in the blink of an eye during downturns and we are left with our sorry work rules. Not good long term thinking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1645373)

Ha Ha! (I cannot resist this one.) A simple yes or no to this question will suffice too.

Manager, do you still beat your wife?

Again, yes or no will be sufficient!:)

Denny