Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 1644812)

One of the "limitations" better be that line holders can't dump them all into the pot so reserves are stuck flying them.

Originally Posted by EdGrimley (Post 1645379)

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.

Originally Posted by shiznit (Post 1644845)

"Seems to be" and "is" are different.

I'd rather not do 30 hr layovers, and if the CDO pays more than a standard duty period with the proper limitations it can be a good thing for the pilots. The devil is in the details, I hope they're done right (and imagine they are given the potential negative press they get). I trust my MEC and NC to do the work. We will find out next week!

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1644849)

It all depends on the other improvements that were gotten and the entire picture of the TA on whether it's a concession or not.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1645369)

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.

Originally Posted by EdGrimley (Post 1645379)

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 movement 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.

Originally Posted by TenYearsGone (Post 1644860)

I dont care what rules are attached to it, CDOs are dangerous. Fatigue will set in and of course, we wont say a thing. Money is a great motivator. Just like these, nonsense 8+ hr domestic days. I am so tired of the hypocrisy. If anybody truly wanted a safe operation, these ridiculous carve outs would be abolished. WHo are we kidding with these "Safety First" slogans?!!!

TEN

Originally Posted by Alan Shore (Post 1645359)

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

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1645387)

I disagree. A CDO is a concession, I don't care what we got for them.

Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1645373)

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.