|
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1646346)
Why not, aren't some of those on JFK transcons? I saw your math, but the company could be factoring in the wh0re factor too. (more available pilots in base) You yourself said these thing will prolly go senior.
|
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1646298)
Sorry, but I don't see anyone doing that. I only see hard debate on a number of thorny issues, with good points being made on both sides. Why not simply keep that up, rather than looking for political boogymen in every post? We all, including me, are looking for a home run, or anything we can hang our hats on to say "DALPA is on it." The harder we look, the more it becomes apparent that DALPA is not on it. Not for the line pilot, anyway. It's completely the opposite of looking for a "political boogeyman." (What is that, anyway? A fancy way of saying "bending over for the company?") |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1646362)
I do. I think we all are seeking and desperately want a home run. We want DALPA to succeed, to step up and deliver.
We all, including me, are looking for a home run, or anything we can hang our hats on to say "DALPA is on it." It's simply not there. Still not sure what to think of CDOs and waiting on the details to make a judgment.... |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1646361)
So wanting to fly a desirable trip makes one a ho? I suppose bidding STR or VCE that pays far more than CDG or DUB doesn't mean that you actually might like VCE or STR more--just that you are a ho?
|
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1646308)
I already voted. Didn't you?
The bigger question in my mind as we head into this next section six is whether the minority (if there is one, I'd love a unanimous vote as a show of unity from the leadership) will throw the majority under the bus or if they will support the majority as another way of displaying unity. I'm tired of 10-9 votes and "it's not my fault" council comms that often come afterward. I asked you earlier why you were OK with wasting $60k+ on FPL to fight the DPA, but were trying to make the case that at 20-40k, memrat was too expensive. Tell you what. Spare us the rhetorical hand-wringing about possible 10-9 votes which is only important to the MEC politicians, anyway. The line guy could give a ****. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1646340)
It should absolutely go to MEMRAT. This is a huge comprehensive TA with its little fingers in a million pies over what was essentially mostly over just two issues for reserves: day one report time and length of long call/leash length.
From the email we got, we dropped the ball BIG TIME with regards to those two things. As it stands now (pre-TA) even the company's union busting unilateral fantasy contract re-write agreed that nothing on day one would be assigned before noon. We go out of our way to find a way to reduce that to the FAR 117 bare bone minimum of 10 hours? Massive concession and completely uncalled for. That was flat out taking from reserves to fund other things and is completely bogus and that that reason alone I hope the TA gets voted down. The other issue was long call length. While it was previously 12 hours and is going to 13, that can hardly be called a win either because you have to look at the realities of the long standing status quo prior. We always had the ability to black out communications for any 9 hour period we want to. The company union busting fantasy memo pretended to impose a fake fantasy 2 hour leash where we must be hot phone call back ready at all times 24 hours a day within that 2 hour window. Obviously that was bogus and pilots that obeyed the current contract would go illegal for the trip sometimes triggering an intimidation attempt PD/CPO drive-by from scheduling. What it sounds like we have now (assuming TA approval) is a hot 3 hour must call back window at all times. That is still a HUGE concession. The company even admitted it could run the operation on 16 hours in the vast majority of cases with no problem. That would have generated a 6 hour call back leash. So we give them 3. Really? Another huge concession used to fund little pet projects all across the contract from an issue that only existed primarilly because of the two reserve issues that we caved on to get the other gains in the first place. Then there is the issue of CDO's, which I have a theoretically open mind to but would have to see the details first and am somewhat skeptical based on what I've seen so far. But even if the language there is a solid win, its only a win in mitigating the potential bad in something we allowed that created the potential bad in the first place. Hardly something worth funding from reserve concessions. This sounds like reserves got thrown under the bus big time. For it to not even include full and immediate back pay for all the bogus and contractually illegal PD's with only the vague pinky promise of "we'll get them in the side letter phase" is simply stunning given the gravity of the other concessions embedded within. Yes there are some nice positives sprinkled around, but most will likely only apply to certain rotations here or there occasionally. The concessions RSV's are having to shoulder to fund these other potentially positive parts are full time every day realities. YES on MEMRAT. NO on the TA. JMHO based on what I've seen so far. "This airline, our airline, is on the move. No longer hemorrhaging cash but declaring significant profits in the traditionally least profitable quarter. No longer acquiring debt to stay alive, but paying down massive amounts of financial obligations. No longer in danger of becoming a penny stock, but becoming investment grade on Wall Street. Delta is buying new jets, buying back stock, and paying dividends to shareholders." "Emerging from bankruptcy, your union representatives decided to examine a different way of doing business with our company. We decided to try to forge a relationship with the people who run this airline, to make the Delta pilots a relevant participant to major decisions about the course of our airline, and to seek beneficial solutions whenever we could leverage our support towards improving our contract." "On Wednesday, we welcomed Delta CEO Richard Anderson and Senior Vice President of Flight Operations Captain Steve Dickson. Their presence at nearly every regular MEC Meeting, along with that of Delta President Ed Bastian, is both symbolic and practical; symbolic of the mutual respect we have acquired, and practical in allowing your representatives to voice your concerns directly to senior management." "As always Mr. Anderson was frank, and your representatives were equally forthright. I won’t try to quote him here, but in general he reiterated the idea that people matter, that employees matter, and that to him they are not the problem, but the solution." "In that light, I am happy to report that during the meeting we informed the MEC that we are very close to an agreement on FAR 117 and its relation to the Pilot Working Agreement. Of course everything hinges on the final language, which will determine whether or not we have a Tentative Agreement to present to the MEC for its consideration. But, we do believe we have a meeting of the minds that will resolve the issues while providing returns to the Delta pilots." |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1646333)
thanks for the info DDC.
and i know this sounds crazy but 6 hours at the hotel and everything that comes with it sounds fatiguing. I'm assuming a few things in order to get my thumbs up....they would have to be stand-alone (i.e not as part of a 4 day trip). I'm assuming one leg in and one leg out (then you do the hokey-pokey and turn yourself about). You'd have to be very selective with the hotels for quick access, as well (I'm thinking like DTW Westin) ...as everyone has said, the details are important to see before I'd give a YES, but I'm not willing to declare Split Duty unsafe when we do so many other types of 'wee hour' flying safely. Because we have several posters here who seem to flip-flop on the safety issue with the following reasoning : A) Split Duty Ops that infringe on WOCL are completely and utterly unsafe. B) International flying that infringes on the WOCL is safe because .1 We've always done it .2 Marketing needs it .3 ER pilots will be more responsible than narrowbody pilots and get more sleep. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1646340)
From the email we got, we dropped the ball BIG TIME with regards to those two things.
As it stands now (pre-TA) even the company's union busting unilateral fantasy contract re-write agreed that nothing on day one would be assigned before noon. We go out of our way to find a way to reduce that to the FAR 117 bare bone minimum of 10 hours? Massive concession and completely uncalled for. That was flat out taking from reserves to fund other things and is completely bogus and that that reason alone I hope the TA gets voted down. Why should a reserve get half a day off on his first day on? Help me understand why that is such a travesty. |
MEMRAT seems like a no-brainer here. If this thing has merit, it will pass.
|
It is fascinating how lost the usual suspects are debating without a highly polished, carefully choreographed set of talking points (which I'm sure are being assembled now).
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:36 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands