Re: Causing a PS Freak-Out
 

Are you saying these two are speaking in favor of getting rid of the PS?

I spoke directly with two other reps during my last trip. I cornered the guy that I thought floated a trial balloon via a third party. Neither would offer survey % on the PS, but then again both said that there is no movement to get rid of the PS. Neither was personally agreeable to getting rid of PS in any case.

Let's separate the identifiable issues:

1) You're trying to score political points against individuals.

2) You're trying to drive the agenda by setting priorities ahead of the MEC, and getting guys to call their reps based on rumors concerning your priorities.

3) The PS is an important component of our compensation. It might be technically "at risk", but it's also deferred compensation, it's clearly ours, and I happen to agree with you that it must remain untouched. Personally, I WANT upside protection, especially if I already paid for it.

So, I share your stance on #3. Not your interest in #1 and #2, however.

The way it was described to me, the MEC is still taking input. They are not at the direction stage, and those meetings are still ahead. They said they had no intention of getting rid of the PS. These guys did not say that PS was more inviolate than any number of other priorities that were on the survey, because they can't, IMO. This is because we haven't even crafted an opener, much less exchanged openers, so there is no way yet to tell what's on the table.

A rep that plainly tells you this isn't exciting, until you meet the other kind. When we went in CH11, I told one of the reps the issues that were absolutely worth shutting it down. I gave him #1. "Oh, we won't touch that under any circumstances. It's safe", he said. OK, #2? "We'll never touch that". #3? "Safe". Etc. I was "amazed" to know we'd go through CH11 without losing Scope, Work-rules, Retirement, or anything else, really. I was amazed at how stupid this guy thought I was, actually, telling me everything I wanted to hear. We all know how that story turned out.

We have those reps on property if you like them, guys that are never at fault for anything, never made any hard calls, were always set against stuff you don't like, and always for stuff you love. If you point out they didn't vote accordingly, they'll whisper it was someone else's fault. A conspiracy. But they have your back. Really.



What's everyone else hearing from reps? Is there anyone that wants to get rid of the PS?

I heard our company had to sue her to get paid for that tour. Not sure if that is true, but I heard it.

It's that time of year again!

The only give back PS stuff I've heard is from Jerry throwing crap against the wall.

I'll be seeing my rep tomorrow... I'll give him an ask. :)

Hmmm...so the talking point is now whether or not we're "getting RID of the profit sharing?" I can see it now: Profit sharing cut in half to help self fund COLA pay increases. But hey, DALPA didn't get RID of profit sharing...so DALPA followed the survey! Awesome.

"If you like your profit sharing plan, you can keep your profit sharing plan. Period!" :rolleyes:

Carl

So is Mike Campbell coming out of retirement to negotiate C2015 or is it going to be Joann Smith?

Just throwing crap on the wall of denial.

And that aircraft to this day sends drug dogs into apoplexy!

No. That is not what I am asking. I actually lived under Delta C2k rates (and work rules) and that would be "restoration" for me.

NWA had their own rates and I don't know what they were. I was asking if he was talking about his c2k rates, Delta's? (at the time)

Just seems the word "restoration" may not be the right word if it is something he never actually had? (Unless he is talking NWA and maybe they were higher)

I agree with you 100 percent Purple. It seems like anytime the Reps end up making a change via elections, the newly "unelectable" are handed full time positions anyway at the local or national level. The way the ratification process work for appointees makes it hard to do anything about it.

This is one of the single biggest issues I have with DALPA.... But the "machine" rolls on protecting their own.

I agree with both of you. We don't have any relics so sacred that that couldn't use the sunlight and invigorating air of a cockpit for a few years here and there. I don't think it would be weird to expect for anyone that sits two terms as a rep, or six years in any combination of positions, to have to take one cycle on the line for three years. It would encourage the recruitment of new blood.