Originally Posted by forgot to bid

I understand that about memrat but what I was saying is "Whether it went to memory rat or not I think the language deserved time to review."

And just as you mentioned this was a big deal and a huge negotiation outside of section 6, but it was also a rare one. How often does the FAA make an FAR change of this magnitude that requires contract negotiations? So if its a rather rare incident then unlike most LOAs maybe it deserved some rare extra attention by those who would be bound by it.

And not doing that was confusing to me because it stirs trouble.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

I have to ask you what does "significant" mean? How would you define "significant" so we all agree on the definition?

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

Let's start here: it's "significant" when the MEC changes the manual to make it easier for them to bypass memrat.

Why would they want to do that?
And why are you OK with that?

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

First, the policy manual resides in the ALPA library for everyone to see and has even been pushed to the devices of those who signed up for the iPubs or Box deliveries. I'm not sure how the manual could be further highlighted without risking further ALPA pub fatigue.

I have to ask you what does "significant" mean? How would you define "significant" so we all agree on the definition?

The policy manual reads:

Collective bargaining agreements that have been approved by the MEC and result from negotiations undertaken pursuant to both Section 28 of the PWA and Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act that both resolve all Section 6 issues and conclude Section 6 negotiations shall be subject to membership ratification. All other agreements shall be subject only to MEC ratification unless the MEC determines that an agreement should be subject to membership ratification.
Assuming you are aware of the policy manual's direction on how to communicate a TA prior to memrat (road shows, pubs, etc ...):
* Did you want membership ratification (with delays to making PD pilots whole)?
* What about your MEC unanimous vote in favor of the agreement?
* If yes, then what would be your suggested change to the policy manual?

My rep asked me about memrat and like everyone else around at that moment I replied "no reason with CDO's removed ... there is no significant change, just improvement." FWIW, the "significant change" litmus was still being used in the decision making process among the reps I communicated with.

I don't understand how memrat would have improved results for Delta pilots, yet I can see how memrat would have harmed Delta pilots by delaying the implementation of improvements and getting guys paid.

Interested on your thoughts on improvement.

Originally Posted by TheManager

Kind of a long winded reply that did not provide any information on the foundation of my post.

Why change that significant portion of when Memrat was to be used in the policy manual? The previous wording would have covered this LOA without all the drama we experienced. It should have been used on all of the JV LOAs that reset look backs and wasn't as it was changed just prior to those.

In hindsight, it would have been beneficial to have had that JV LOA language and pressure tested it prior to buying off on it. Lots of pilot jobs and advancement evaporated. Would that not have been considered a significant change to our contract?

You state that Memrat would have delayed putting money back into the pockets of those that had PDs. Really? For how long do you suppose? Putting the language of the LOA on the secured side of the alpa website and allowing people to peruse it over a week is enough. No road shows necessary. So I fail to see where your argument against Memrat on those grounds even gains any lift all. Same goes for your argument of delaying improvements. BTW. Which ones? Everything implemented now is a company benefit. Ours are delayed until November.

Oh, and my thoughts for improvement: change the policy manual language on Memrat back to what it was.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

My PDs were reversed today. That was quicker than I expected.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

My PDs were reversed today. That was quicker than I expected.

Originally Posted by TheManager

Delta adding Seattle flights to Maui, Mexico and more



Posted by Kristin Jackson
Delta Air Lines is adding more flights from Seattle to popular beach and ski destinations, plus regional service to Spokane, as it keeps strongly expanding service at Sea-Tac Airport and continues to give regional powerhouse Alaska Airlines a run for the money.

Delta plans to add service from Seattle to Maui plus to Cabo San Lucas and Puerto Vallarta, Mexico; Calgary, Alberta; Spokane; and Bozeman, Mont.

The Delta flights will begin in November and December (international flights still are awaiting government approval). Here’s the word from Delta on the new routes:

Four daily flights to Spokane International Airport using two-class, 65-seat CRJ-700 aircraft beginning Nov. 3
Two daily flights to Calgary International Airport using two-class, 76-seat Embraer E-175 aircraft, beginning Nov. 3
New Seattle service beginning Dec. 20 includes:

One daily flight to Maui’s Kahului Airport using a Boeing 757-200.
One daily seasonal flight to Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport through Jan. 4, 2015, then Saturday service from Jan. 10 through March 28, 2015, using two-class, 76-seat Embraer E-175 aircraft.
Four weekly flights to Los Cabos through Jan. 10, 2015, then Saturday service beginning Jan. 17, 2015, using an Airbus A319 aircraft.
Four weekly flights to Puerto Vallarta through Jan. 10, 2015, then Saturday service beginning Jan. 17, 2015, using an Airbus A319 aircraft.