Originally Posted by scambo1

I have a tough time believing that the reps didn't also get an earful from 330 guys on the rest facility.

Originally Posted by scambo1

But, generally speaking, I agree with you that including CDOs on the survey is not a guarantee that we will see them in c15, but possibly a gauge of sentiment on them from the pilot group as a whole. However, there is clearly a faction on the MEC that won't let them die.

Originally Posted by Alan Shore

I am certain that they got an earful when the bunk went away. What I'm saying is that I doubt they got an earful saying "good job" when the TA brought it back. Guys typically contact their reps only when there is something negative to report.



Could be. It could also be that the MEC is merely thinking ahead as to what management may come after and wants our opinion on each of those subjects, e.g., CDOs, pay banding, sick leave verification, etc. I saw questions on a number of such possible Company asks in the survey. The closer we get to 100% participation, the more clearly and loudly our voices will be heard on those issues.

Originally Posted by scambo1

Okay, I understand what you meant on the 330 now.

I agree that participation on the survey needs to be as close to 100% as possible. In fact, I think it should be mandatory or you can't fly. However, that's not reality.

I do think the company will certainly revisit sick leave.

Originally Posted by scambo1

Okay, I understand what you meant on the 330 now.

I agree that participation on the survey needs to be as close to 100% as possible. In fact, I think it should be mandatory or you can't fly. However, that's not reality.

I do think the company will certainly revisit sick leave.

Originally Posted by sailingfun

Speaking of the 330, do they have a hot mike system or does Delta cut the wires to that feature?

Originally Posted by Hillbilly

How do you see that improving your personal situation or that of your fellow pilots going forward?

If you were saying that you carefully filled out your survey, gave input to your reps, participated in the process and when a TA came out and it did not meet your needs/desires and you voted "No" while looking for the option to vote "Oh Hell No, Stick It Up Your Ass", I would say right on brotha!! Instead you leave me with this.

Originally Posted by shiznit

"The Contract survey is the first step towards a strike vote"
-Capt. Donatelli

What has more leverage for Negotiators: a 53% turnout for a strike vote or 99% turnout for a strike vote?

If we get 99% of our fellow pilots to do the survey, it gives the NC a strong mandate at the table to get much more of what we ask.

If only half do the survey, well, that's not nearly the same amount of leverage for the NC is it?

Are you going to help IMPROVE the NC's leverage to get a better deal or are you going to REDUCE the NC's leverage?

If you are satisfied with 4/8/3/3 sure, let's have only 53% do the survey again.

Originally Posted by RonRicco

I have to agree with Shiz on this, and I guess Carl as well. Pilots give input/direction in many different ways. Look at the CDO issue, there was no survey or poll (that I know of anyway) but pilots gave input directly to their reps and were heard.

With a 53 percent response rate on a survey, that certainly leaves the door open that 47 percent of pilots with differing (or maybe the same) views gave input to their reps in alternative ways and unless we consider the survey the ultimate mandate, that form of input must be factored in as well.

How do you make the survey the ultimate, or at least the heaviest weighted mandate? 100 percent participation. For every pilot that refuses to fill it out, the less statistically valid it becomes.

Say we only end up with 40 percent that fill it out this time and the vote on CDO's is slightly "no", but the squeaky wheel this time happens to be people that are in favor. The rep is going to have to make more of a judgement call when it come to saying "no to cdo" than he otherwise would have if the participation rate was 100 percent.

The survey is but one form of input. The less participation, the more discretion you are giving to your reps. For me, that isn't exactly an option I am thrilled about considering the 117 issue.....

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44

The results are held secret. The participation rate can be a secret too. There is no accountability with our survey. I am not going to participate. I don't believe my results make a difference. I did not always feel this way. The last contract was just so far off from what I wanted that I find it hard to believe that ALPA considered it. I can't be the only one that feels this way.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44

I don't believe my results make a difference. I did not always feel this way. The last contract was just so far off from what I wanted that I find it hard to believe that ALPA considered it. I can't be the only one that feels this way.