![]() |
|
|
Originally Posted by Diesel1030
(Post 1870588)
daily Call to Action reminder..takes just a few seconds of our time. I was on the jumpseat with an ALPA rep the other day and only 3000ish people have sent one. Easy to do.
Ok, submitted again. Playing this silly game. Of course we want our jobs.:rolleyes: TEN |
Originally Posted by TenYearsGone
(Post 1870828)
How many of these do we have to do? I have done a lot this year, wont another one fall on deaf ears?? They get the same "crafted" letter 3000 times or more.
Ok, submitted again. Playing this silly game. Of course we want our jobs.:rolleyes: TEN Can it hurt? Nope. I fill them out because I have seen (first hand) politicians inquire as to how many of our members support a given issue. It gives our government affairs guys more ammo when they are in there dealing with (sometimes) irrational, (nearly always) short-sighted, self-serving politicians that only seek to please the highest bidder OR the one that can offer them votes/influence/support. We are at a severe disadvantage in DC because "they" will always have deeper pockets. We need every edge we can get, and then it still might not be enough. Good on you Diesel for seeing the importance of these issues, even as a "Delta noooob." I think we may have met about a month ago. War Eagle?:D Ten, thanks for filling it out again. It is a pita, but worth our time. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1870822)
That's a Mitsubishi "Tool Bag." |
Originally Posted by TenYearsGone
(Post 1870828)
How many of these do we have to do?
|
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 1870880)
As many as it takes, right? We need to be like Andy Dufresne: Dear Mr. Dufresne, here are your books, but for God's sake quit writing us.
|
Originally Posted by Diesel1030
(Post 1870588)
daily Call to Action reminder..takes just a few seconds of our time. I was on the jumpseat with an ALPA rep the other day and only 3000ish people have sent one. Easy to do.
I just wish his message on 2015 was as passionate and fired up! The communication from him on our negotiations sounds like we already lost. IMHO contract 2012 2.0 is around the corner. |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1870844)
Does it help? Who knows
Can it hurt? Nope. I fill them out because I have seen (first hand) politicians inquire as to how many of our members support a given issue. It gives our government affairs guys more ammo when they are in there dealing with (sometimes) irrational, (nearly always) short-sighted, self-serving politicians that only seek to please the highest bidder OR the one that can offer them votes/influence/support. We are at a severe disadvantage in DC because "they" will always have deeper pockets. We need every edge we can get, and then it still might not be enough. Good on you Diesel for seeing the importance of these issues, even as a "Delta noooob." I think we may have met about a month ago. War Eagle?:D Ten, thanks for filling it out again. It is a pita, but worth our time. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1870639)
Ed never claimed that. This was hashed out over and over again.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1870639)
The companies claim to Wallstreet when asked how they could afford the contract was that all the changes with the refleeting being the biggest would pay for the contractual improvements via increased revenue and productivity.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1870639)
You need only look at the quarterly reports to see how much pilot costs have gone up since the start of the contract. They certainly have not stayed the same.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1870639)
As far as offsets there were something like 5 or 6. The big two were reducing when a reserve was full and counting vacations and all known absences when determine full status. Others included increased training and vacation pay and the increase in sick leave. The sick leave part turned out to be far greater then the company expected hence their current fixation with that subject.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1870993)
Yes he did fud. The only reason it keeps getting rehashed is because you deny the quotes and the truth. Why you do this, is another question.
Incorrect. Ed and Richard stated in multiple documents (posted right here on APC years ago) that the pilots 2012 contract was cost neutral and that the savings would allow Delta to invest in initiatives that benefit other employees at Delta. As you well know, the quarterly reports don't state pilot costs. Intersting that you use the word "offsets." Does everyone see how clever that is? What he really means is concessions. The work rule, sick leave and scope concessions coupled with the profit sharing concessions is what allowed management to make the accurate claim that our 2012 contract was cost neutral. Carl |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:29 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands