Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Is the same process we have in place for large violations of the PWA. We can grieve it, or negotiate it. Not sure there is much taste for the second, but the first will take a ton of time during section 6.
Also codifying damages of non compliance in the PWA just would make contractual violations a business decision. IE violate the EASK provisions just pay the pilots dollars. Trust me, you do that, you create data that makes violating the PWA a good business decision. IE a dangerous road to travel. Esp w scope.
Also codifying damages of non compliance in the PWA just would make contractual violations a business decision. IE violate the EASK provisions just pay the pilots dollars. Trust me, you do that, you create data that makes violating the PWA a good business decision. IE a dangerous road to travel. Esp w scope.
And for the above reason, it is already a good business decision to violate the contract. Corporations are people too, right? If they know that a violation will not be resolved for 3 or 4 years, that is a lot of coin in the bank that can be invested/leveraged to cover any reasonable damages they can expect to incur. Again, the cards are squarely stacked against us on these kinds of issues. However, I would still have the lawsuit paperwork ready to go as soon as the violation "occurs".
I disagree. On this issue, I am coming down on the hard liners' side. This needs filing immediately upon occurrence of the violation. We know exactly when that occurs, and since the lawyers are on retainer, to have them draft the paperwork gives them something to do besides drink ALPA coffee all day.
Yeah. That's what I thought you'd say. Grievance or negotiation, the result will be the same. Ultimately, jobs will have been sold. Not saying that this is in any way dALPA's fault, but there is no way that I can think of that any contract violation on the company's part can NOT result in monetary damages which equates to a sale of jobs. Unless we could write something into the contract that directly affects the operation of our JV partners (good luck with that) I don't see any other "remedy" as realistically achievable.
And for the above reason, it is already a good business decision to violate the contract. Corporations are people too, right? If they know that a violation will not be resolved for 3 or 4 years, that is a lot of coin in the bank that can be invested/leveraged to cover any reasonable damages they can expect to incur. Again, the cards are squarely stacked against us on these kinds of issues. However, I would still have the lawsuit paperwork ready to go as soon as the violation "occurs".
And for the above reason, it is already a good business decision to violate the contract. Corporations are people too, right? If they know that a violation will not be resolved for 3 or 4 years, that is a lot of coin in the bank that can be invested/leveraged to cover any reasonable damages they can expect to incur. Again, the cards are squarely stacked against us on these kinds of issues. However, I would still have the lawsuit paperwork ready to go as soon as the violation "occurs".
If the only remedy/penalty is a financial one lets make them pay dearly. Since our ALPA money folks are so sharp let them calculate the fine. Count every flight that the Big D made that was out of compliance. Someone somewhere surely knows the revenue generated by each flight. Flights X revenue = Big money fine.
Some might find it odd for me to be speaking past acl65pilot here, but this post and those that follow are instructive of his naked political double and triple speak. If you weren't reading closely, you might miss the Bill Clinton impersonation in this non-response to tsquare:
Isn't that special? He's not saying he disagrees with tsquare...but does that mean he agrees with tsquare? It means yes and no. It means nothing and everything.
"I'd" is the contraction for "I would". So acl65pilot would tell tsquare to write his reps. Is acl65pilot suggesting that tsquare write his reps, or just that he would tell him to do that for some reason. It means write or don't write, nothing and everything.
A college level example of political double speak.
Carl
Isn't that special? He's not saying he disagrees with tsquare...but does that mean he agrees with tsquare? It means yes and no. It means nothing and everything.
"I'd" is the contraction for "I would". So acl65pilot would tell tsquare to write his reps. Is acl65pilot suggesting that tsquare write his reps, or just that he would tell him to do that for some reason. It means write or don't write, nothing and everything.
A college level example of political double speak.
Carl
Its been almost 4 months, or 1/3 of the "cure period".
How bad out of balance were we on 04-01-2014, and how far out of balance are we now?
For the first 1/3 of the cure period, what (if anything) has the company done to, well, cure it?
IMO we should be getting monthly updates about this exact thing.
By the way, how long do we have to be cured in order to be cured? One year? Or the same 4 years we gave them in the first place?
Also, does TLV count for the AF/KLM JV? What if we milk it for weeks, or months, or quarters….all the while our "JV Partner" does it several times a day, or maybe increases service?
How bad out of balance were we on 04-01-2014, and how far out of balance are we now?
For the first 1/3 of the cure period, what (if anything) has the company done to, well, cure it?
IMO we should be getting monthly updates about this exact thing.
By the way, how long do we have to be cured in order to be cured? One year? Or the same 4 years we gave them in the first place?
Also, does TLV count for the AF/KLM JV? What if we milk it for weeks, or months, or quarters….all the while our "JV Partner" does it several times a day, or maybe increases service?
I don't feel entitled to a job or what comes with it, and feel that a good case needs to be made for why the group deserves what it gets; but I do feel that as part of the pilot group I am entitled to expressing why the GROUP can argue for restoration, or steps toward restoration. Trying to silence dissent to an opinion one does not agree with using the argument that because that someone wasn't personally and directly affected at a moment in time is trying to set them apart from the group. I expect my FO rep to not feel he can't argue for restoration because he has to avoid stepping on the toes of those who would scoff at his not having been personally affected at the time. Agreed?
What freaking difference does it make? Really? If he's working for you or me, he SHOULD be paid, I don't care what day it is. Do you want to fly for free? Or am I missing your point?
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,868
Profit Sharing
From the DELTANET:
The results included $340 million set aside for employee profit sharing, which will be paid out next February. Delta has reserved $439 million this year for profit sharing. Last year, Delta’s profit sharing payout was $506 million for all of 2013.
A 12% profit sharing payout seems plausible at this point.
Scoop
The results included $340 million set aside for employee profit sharing, which will be paid out next February. Delta has reserved $439 million this year for profit sharing. Last year, Delta’s profit sharing payout was $506 million for all of 2013.
A 12% profit sharing payout seems plausible at this point.
Scoop
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
If the only remedy/penalty is a financial one lets make them pay dearly. Since our ALPA money folks are so sharp let them calculate the fine. Count every flight that the Big D made that was out of compliance. Someone somewhere surely knows the revenue generated by each flight. Flights X revenue = Big money fine.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post