|
|
Originally Posted by Free Mason
(Post 1695690)
I would state that most of the MEC that voted for it is no longer on the MEC, but the IAAC Chair of that time, is now an EA and the MEC does not vote on them, just confirms.
Gotcha. Nu |
This AE is a buzzkill.
|
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1695600)
methinks Donatelli has some paperwork to generate.
Its now become clear that the Pacific LOA was a complete surrender. All it did was make sure the pull down in the Pacific is legal under the contract. We should have grieved the Narita slots contract violation. At least we might have got some cash. Let's face it. ALPA doesn't want any conflict or tension whatsoever. The real reason we have that LOA is so labor risk stays "off the table" at Delta Air Lines. Same pattern with the 117 thing and the Dickson memo. That was about as "in your face", "screw the contract" as management can get. Yet still no grievance. My fear is that DALPA is going to do the same thing with the current AF/KLM contract violation. Just to preserve Moak's precious labor peace we are going to negotiate away our production balance in exchange for another promise to only cut 15% of our flying. And then call it a win. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1695729)
This AE is a buzzkill.
|
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1695499)
When do the first of the 10 new A330's show up? I thought the first one comes in Jan. 15? Maybe they are the 747 replacements? :eek:
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1695518)
They are delayed. Still getting 4 next year but first one will be on May assuming that airbus does not have more issues.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1695734)
Yup. As our widebody fleet slowly fades away, I would expect a Chairman's Letter pretty soon on why the international codesharing and joint venture agreements are still a good thing.
Its now become clear that the Pacific LOA was a complete surrender. All it did was make sure the pull down in the Pacific is legal under the contract. We should have grieved the Narita slots contract violation. At least we might have got some cash. Let's face it. ALPA doesn't want any conflict or tension whatsoever. The real reason we have that LOA is so labor risk stays "off the table" at Delta Air Lines. Same pattern with the 117 thing and the Dickson memo. That was about as "in your face", "screw the contract" as management can get. Yet still no grievance. My fear is that DALPA is going to do the same thing with the current AF/KLM contract violation. Just to preserve Moak's precious labor peace we are going to negotiate away our production balance in exchange for another promise to only cut 15% of our flying. And then call it a win. Nu |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1695734)
Yup. As our widebody fleet slowly fades away, I would expect a Chairman's Letter pretty soon on why the international codesharing and joint venture agreements are still a good thing.
Its now become clear that the Pacific LOA was a complete surrender. All it did was make sure the pull down in the Pacific is legal under the contract. We should have grieved the Narita slots contract violation. At least we might have got some cash. Let's face it. ALPA doesn't want any conflict or tension whatsoever. The real reason we have that LOA is so labor risk stays "off the table" at Delta Air Lines. Same pattern with the 117 thing and the Dickson memo. That was about as "in your face", "screw the contract" as management can get. Yet still no grievance. My fear is that DALPA is going to do the same thing with the current AF/KLM contract violation. Just to preserve Moak's precious labor peace we are going to negotiate away our production balance in exchange for another promise to only cut 15% of our flying. And then call it a win. Everyone should look at the posts here from before the NRT LOA. Remember who was saying what Check now says above, and remember the DALPA-oids who were saying what great "protections" it would offer us? Somebody said this earlier, but it bears repeating: "Hey DALPA, stop negotiating protections for us." Carl |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 1695741)
There were some on the MEC who waved the BS flag on this.
Nu Carl |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 1695741)
There were some on the MEC who waved the BS flag on this.
Nu |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1695743)
Totally agree.
Everyone should look at the posts here from before the NRT LOA. Remember who was saying what Check now says above, and remember the DALPA-oids who were saying what great "protections" it would offer us? Somebody said this earlier, but it bears repeating: "Hey DALPA, stop negotiating protections for us." Carl |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:29 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands