acl65pilot

Plenty of times. Many times thorough inference. Let say you don't that is good!
My suggestions are real simple. Give management bookends that we are willing to do. High and absolute mins that we will accept for this deal to be done. It is their bidding to do not ours. We cannot sit at the table and do this deal for them. What we can do is tell them that for a JV to look like A, we will be X, for it to look like B, we will need it to look like Y, for it to look like C, we will need it to look like Z. I am sure as the day is long that the set of circumstances are dynamic, and I agree that putting blanket demands on the talks and or deals would hinder. As I stated before, bookends (top and min acceptable outcomes) Adapting to the new world does not mean we need to see the farm. We have the coveted access to the board, and have a vote. DALPA knows exactly what is going on and with these bookends in place can help craft on the fly a very good outcome for the pilots. That is like you say DALPA's mission statement.

What I would suggest as a layman looking at the playing field is this. JAL, and the Japanese government are looking for a way to pull JAL and the Japanese government's money out of hot water. Suffice to say, if AMR was the answer it would have been done. My take away today is that both of those parties want the Skyteam alliance.
We are a huge party to making this happen. We have the ability to make the company offer their employees that will be out of work jobs, not just pilots but ramp workers, ticket agents, et al. We will also offer employment to their employees as we take over some of their shed routes. We off JAL to join the Skyteam immediately, and start interline ticketing up in 60 days or less. We offer their contract pilot preferential employment opportunities here at DAL, most are expats, we offer with the access of Haneda dropping out complaint of open skies. We offer money on a graduated scale to JAL's revenue stream. We offer preferred access for their customer to our lounges, and rewards programs. We as a company make the deal sweet enough that the company has a positive revenue stream with this deal. This deal has a lot of danger attached to it. JAL is sick, and a simple cash infusion is not the end all be all. There is some major viability for the Skyteam partners and us as pilots with going along with this deal. Log term it is good, sort term it could be ugly.

One last thing, we get right of first refusal on all of their gates, planes and routes.

There you go again. My simple answer is allow the company to obtain the deal as they choose, but with the understanding that we want like I said a min of a, b, c to allow this to happen. I also feel very strongly that for us to complete this JV it will be good for the company. Money wise it will be real good in a few years. I want some of that in my and your pocket. Give them the access they want, let it go 50-50 if it has to to appease the Japanese government, but make it known that we DALPA want paid directly to our pilots a percentage of the revenue/profit stream from the deal. That is our blood money for doing it. How much was AF again? How many billions? Even 10% of that is a ton of money for us. The neat part about that is that that deal is totally independent of the deal they do with JAL or the Japanese government. It is between our company and us.
That is a suggestion that allows the company to get their deal and for us to maintain our flying and get some positive return for our cooperation.

As for Haneda. I stated that one way or another we will have some access. The Japanese are hard bargainers and will eek everything they can from us. Showing that we have to have this no matter what, really shows our hand in the whole game. They want us, but to me it appears we may have given them the upper hand.
My input to the mec is simple. Do not create a deal that will have loopholes in it. Build upon the inclusiveness of the AF deal. Make the deal graduated that if they do A we get B, if C happens we get D. A blanket agreement generally only works for day 1.


Great, I am glad you did, and you should realize and agree that DAL mismanaged Frankfurt.
What jobs are you referring to? Our or JAL's?
I would like us to promote our jobs. If we can save their jobs that is great for unity. Make their pilots DAL pilots. How is that for unity!


I am sure it is guided by that statement, but the simple fact is that this needs to be good for us. Not neutral. I understand the world is changing, and we are adapting. We are in a truly unique situation with JAL. It would be great if we could make it happen. I truly understand the importance of it. We need to be greedy to a point. I agree with that, but we need to make it benefit us. We can have both. For that I am sure.

I am sure that us bending over and giving the farm will not change the money side of it one way or another. Politically the jobs are important for the Japanese government, but they see green like everyone else. I would love to save those jobs, and make em DAL jobs. Take the people. This time lets not fire them like we did in FRA. (we still had to pay them, one point that many did not realize until after the fact)
Lets practice unity and make them us. As many of their employees as we can. Lets give the new Japanese government a political win in this down turn. In turn lets make this deal really good for DAL and its pilots.

I am not against you. I am against the idea of trying to manage expectations. That has got to stop.

slowplay

Jmo, but your writing says otherwise.

If you call interjecting facts, scenarios, and real world possibilities into a debate that heretofore had been filled with "hopium" managing expectations, then I'm guilty. I don't apologize for that.

acl65pilot

There was also the simple fact that we had given in LOA 46. The claim was as good as it was because all things considered the pension was no that underfunded.
I agree most of this. I think that it is in managements interest to make it beneficial to us as well. There is only so much blood in a turnip, and the simple fact is that there needed to be some give back, no matter how larger or small one may feel it is or was.

We have had some great international growth. Much of that push started prior to the AF/DAL JV deal. I also agree that we are getting feed from their feed and vice versa. It is good for both corporate parties. We get some job protection, but like I suggest for the JAL JV we need to get part of that increased revenue stream.
Good and lets make sure that as the company and group that is saving this airline we get some positives for us. I would love for their contracted work to be brought in house. That is a small request for helping this airline and their government.
Correct as we would not fill all of our seats. It is part of the reason that the small RJ lift does not work anymore either. A point is that this is good for the company and for us but marginally. We need to see better gains from this type of deal. Money, jobs, along with the security that the venture may add
Let make it benefit us more. Lets get some improvements. We are after all a risk sharing partner in these deals.
It happened because of a few things. One was a need or desire for a merger. We got something from it. I still think that AMR is doing really well considering they are still under their concessionary agreement. Yes, that may change, but for now apples to apples. CAL sold the farm to keep their pensions. We sold our pensions to keep a few other things. NWA sold a bunch of stuff to keep their pensions.

We got a percentage of the company, which is great. We on the South side got 17% over four year. Not great, but not bad. We agreed to leave scope on small jets where it is, and that is the one place I think we could have seen gains on in the JPWA.....

To do what the company wanted to do with NWA required our corporation. We gave it, and have done a great job to date. We will continue to succeed for this company. We are professionals it is what we do. What most pilots want is a quicker return to better wages and rules. With all of these JV's and code share agreements that make the company stronger, the average line joe sees many occasions where we could be doing it quicker than we are. That in a nut shell is the point.
We need to care where others are, but a few more percentage points will not hinder the plan.

scambo1

If DAL gets married up with JAL, I'd expect a rapid merger/sale of United's asia op to either CAL or AA and then a CAL / AA merger. Yeah, yeah I hear you all saying no way.

While I cannot see far enough around that corner to tell whether it would be good or bad in the law of unintended consequences dept. I'd guess it would certainly be a consequence.

At the end of the "chess game" Haneda access is the critical treaty permission. Whether or not we get a piece of that action tells you if our gov't negotiators are idiots or not.

DALPA in this business transaction is definitely not in a position to dictate, because AF/KLM are a financing stream. However, DALPA should be able to get some bennies as a result - lots of cheap/free contract improvements plus some stock (not held back)

Discuss

Scambo

acl65pilot

What I do not like is being told we can't do that.

telling the group there is no way to get anything and we would be lucky to get the access, imo is plain wrong. We are past 1113C and it is time to get some gains. That is my point.

I have no problem with facts. You threw a scenario out there with maybe oil here, maybe there, maybe access, maybe no, save jobs, but who's, growth but for whom?

All great questions but please finish the thoughts. If you can't because of the NDA then fine. But state that.
Tell me what you know, what you hear the Japanese are doing saying or thinking, and I will give you a relative and rational response. What you have stated is that they have all the cookies and the recipe, which they do not. We have the money and the access that Oneworld does not. That is huge, and the linchpin to all of this.

acl65pilot

My point is that we need a quid pro quo. I like a percentage of the revenue DAL gets from in myself.

Check Essential

Really?
You answer criticism that you're too cozy with managment by telling me to go ask management if you've been doing the right thing?
I'm sure Hauenstein would tell me that this MEC has played a vital role in the growth of our "international footprint". I'm sure he thinks the Joint Ventures have been a great success and a huge revenue generator.

I've got my own expert right here at the house though. I don't need "Glen". --->

"Honey, how's this MEC been doing on revenue generation for payment of our mortgage and the growth of our kids' college fund?"

My expert says, "not so good".

georgetg

Does our MEC maintain regular contact with the pilot reps at the other Sky Team partners?

I ask this because a buddy of mine is the FO rep for ANA and travels multiple times a year to meet with the other Star Alliance reps...

Cheers
George

acl65pilot

I am sure it has been good for the company. Simple fact is that the AF deal bring in a ton of money for the company. It also need to bring in a ton of money for us. That is what we need to shoot for a percentage of the revenue. That is real dollars that are on a 10-K that cannot be altered. It can be a smaller percentage than we would get with the profit, but any money to our pockets is a good thing.

Currently we might be getting bigger gauged jets on MCI-ATL That is real money but it is not as much as it should be.

I know Slow, I am just plain unrealistic, but heck someone needs to fight for this group at every juncture. Try asking and see what you get. The company wants this. Threats of doom worked before, we made it through any way. Lets get something for the boys!

slowplay

You write about things that you were not here for and through those writings you show you know nothing about them.

The ALPA Claim had nothing to do with the pension. If the pension had been preserved, the Claim would have still been paid. The number was the same. You weren't a Delta pilot when it was paid out.

The pension was grossly underfunded (about 38% at termination) and according to PBGC will cost them $900 million of their money. It will cost the plan participants (the guys who were actually here and had real losses) a lot more than that.

The pension was terminated because it met the standards for termination. A qualified ERISA benefit cannot be negotiated away. Your assertion is insulting to those that worked so hard to make sure you had a company to come to work for.

Oh, and the JCBA tightened small jet scope. You know that. If you added up the total number of NWA and DAL permitted aircraft, it was far greater than the 255 limit.

So please, how about sticking to facts. All these facts have been clearly presented in official Court and ALPA publications.

Now back to your regularly scheduled "I want more" Latest and Greatest...