I suspect it hinges on the concept of the global production balance. I'd like to hear more about it. I think the idea is that we have multiple JV agreements that have individual balances, but that we need an overall floor on the % of the global flying that the multiple JV's represent.

We also don't seem to have much protection for VA currently. I think we're essentially guaranteed 75% * ownership % of the total flying, i.e. we're guaranteed 37.5% of the flying in question. BFD. Then again, I believe we're guaranteed then-existing block hours at the time of the transaction, so maybe we're giving some wiggle room there.

The company does this because they make more money doing this.:D Remember, DAL owns 49% of VA. It is cheaper for DAL to make profit using more VA metal.

DAL owns shares of GOL and AERO-MEXICO too. Look for similar changes in the future.

I know why the company does it, what I dont understand is why ALPA goes along with it. Alpa is much smarter than I am, so I will keep quiet.

In my opinion, when management and labor are buddy-buddy, relationships tend to favor towards management's side.

It is what it is and there is nothing you can do to change it.

TEN

So wait. You are saying that delta can make more money in profit as they use VA metal and we have less flying, correct?

Oh, and we also have others saying we should monetize our profit sharing and give it up completely or significantly to buy better hourly rates from the company?

Insane, isn't it?

Give up profit sharing and give up a portion of our higher paying WB pilot positions.....

Hey, it's the best we could get......on the first shot

Stay away ! :D

Except, the flights are always full and the only way to get up there is on the jumpseat.


Jumpseats to any NYC airport always have spikes, or tacks, or invisible superglue in them. :)


Stay away. :)

We might as well just remove the international scope language from our contract.
It would be more intellectually honest than these ridiculous agreements we've been signing.

Let's get real.
These "production balance" percentages are nothing but an endorsement of more outsourcing.
ALPA must think we won't understand. Or won't care. The sad part is they are probably right.
As long as they leave a few crumbs for us, this LOA basically allows management to do whatever they want.
I guess that's one way to make sure they will always be "in compliance" with our scope.

What a joke.

Has anyone called or written their reps now that we see some of the language before the vote? Doesn't seem to be the same outrage that was going on before the 117 TA.

Some people used up their allocation of "outraged" a long time ago. Some are foaming at the mouth because they exert themselves, and some drool gently while they snore. Usually, we go ballistic just ahead of the facts, which I guess is why my reps carefully shield me from the facts, so the peace is undisturbed. The dogs bark, the caravan rides on.

Things that are marginal end up being described as positive, and things that are actually good get torn apart as an outrage.

It's all very confusing. I'm going to try develop the facts nice and slow, or simply let the apathy gently take hold, I'm not sure which just yet.

For those using a gps antenna with the company issued tablet, which devices are you using and have you had any problems? I've read some reviews on a few that say there are connectivity issues above certain altitudes, anyone experience this?