Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Closed Thread Subscribe

Page 17315 of 20174

17315

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

11-26-2014 | 03:22 PM

#173141

Sink r8

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Jun 2009

Posts: 5,113

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorfman

Council 1 sent it out to all their members. I would expect others to follow now

Thanks. Mind sending me a PM?

11-26-2014 | 03:33 PM

#173142

Jughead135

Line Holder

Joined: Sep 2011

Posts: 1,098

Likes: 2

From: Hates Commuting

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun

If you only have 11 days it will be bid as 1 period. I would buy 3 more days. You can go negative in the bank to do it. That will let you bid two different weeks.

Thanks, sailingfun. That first part is sort of what I expected (11 days = 1 period). The second part, I just don't understand the mechanics of it (buying more days)....

I've been slogging through §7 of the PWA. It talks about having more than 14 days of "earned vacation" in order to split. The definition of "earned vacation" is slightly nebulous to me (could read it either way, to include--or not--days "bought"). It also talks about adding "bought" days to the beginning or end of a vacation period. Does that mean the vacation period has to be established before the day(s) can be added? Catch-22, no?!?

11-26-2014 | 03:43 PM

#173143

qball

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Mar 2011

Posts: 1,410

Likes: 1

From: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8

Thanks. Mind sending me a PM?

Its language from LOA 14-07…VA JV. MEC will vote on it at Dec MEC meeting Dec 8-12

11-26-2014 | 04:00 PM

#173144

Flamer

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Jul 2009

Posts: 1,044

Likes: 3

From: Lowest Pay I Could Find

Quote:

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

New Virgin Atlantic TA.

Does that mean "if the company is not in compliance this year, it must be in compliance next year?"

what is the motivation to remain in compliance?

as we've seen from the AF/KLM language, the company has no problem blowing off its obligations.

I'm sure we'll get 'em next time.

Yeah in layman's terms that says the company should maybe try to attempt to be in compliance every other year. It's like we never learn with this stuff. Face palm. Every other year is good enough?

11-26-2014 | 04:11 PM

#173145

Purple Drank

Straight QOL, homie

Joined: Feb 2012

Posts: 4,202

Likes: 1

From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator

And why was it released Wednesday afternoon before the long Thanksgiving weekend?

Hoping we'd forget about it come Monday?

11-26-2014 | 04:11 PM

#173146

qball

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Mar 2011

Posts: 1,410

Likes: 1

From: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8

Thanks. Mind sending me a PM?

PM sent

11-26-2014 | 04:50 PM

#173147

Denny Crane

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Sep 2008

Posts: 6,971

Likes: 0

From: Kickin’ Back

Quote:

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

And why was it released Wednesday afternoon before the long Thanksgiving weekend?

Hoping we'd forget about it come Monday?

Or...............maybe the MEC wants input from the rank and file before they vote on it? According to qball, the vote is not going to be until the December MEC meeting.

Denny

11-26-2014 | 04:51 PM

#173148

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 12,487

Likes: 0

From: 747-400 Captain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

New Virgin Atlantic TA.

Quote:

If the Company is not in compliance with the minimum international operation requirement (under Section 1 R. 1.) or the minimum ASK requirement (under Section 1 R. 2.) in any measurement period, the Company will cure any such breach by complying with the minimum international operation or ASK requirement, as applicable, in the subsequent measurement period.

Does that mean "if the company is not in compliance this year, it must be in compliance next year?"

what is the motivation to remain in compliance?

as we've seen from the AF/KLM language, the company has no problem blowing off its obligations.

I'm sure we'll get 'em next time.

If that's really the language, it has to be a 100% NO vote from our reps. Let's assume the language requires a 50/50 split. These paragraphs would allow for 10% Delta 90% Virgin on year one, then the company would be perfectly legal if they made it 50/50 the next year. That would be considered a "cure" for that 10/90 year.

Our reps need to send a message to this ridiculously weak negotiating committee that we won't tolerate this anymore. There must be clearly defined and substantial penalties immediately applied for non-compliance. How could our negotiators not know something this basic?

Really hope the ATL line pilots will put the squeeze on those four reps of theirs to vote NO. Anything else will be a terrible signal of weakness to send as we approach 2015 openers.

Carl

11-26-2014 | 04:53 PM

#173149

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 12,487

Likes: 0

From: 747-400 Captain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Or...............maybe the MEC wants input from the rank and file before they vote on it? According to qball, the vote is not going to be until the December MEC meeting.

If the paragraph that PD quoted is correct, what will be the direction you give to your reps Denny?

Carl

11-26-2014 | 07:13 PM

#173150

80ktsClamp

Da Hudge

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 17,473

Likes: 0

From: Poodle Whisperer

Looks like with the latest FDRA APB, they are still having us accept the FAR 117 extension by signing the FDRA then leaving it at the gate.

I'm just not ok with that logic... any word from ALPA on it?