![]() |
|
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1878943)
So we'll count you as a pre-emotive yes.
I'll vote on what I see in the TA. Not what others tell me is a bad deal, before we see it. |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1878940)
Trip,
I'm sorry, but all I can do is face palm. Vote yes for concessions or we will have to wait 39 months to be offered these concessions again. |
Originally Posted by Professor
(Post 1878855)
This is a fair point.
But a better, or at least as good a question, is how many carriers have actually benefited by turning down section 6 contracts negotiated in good faith? One? In twenty years? Arguably zero? Dunno. I think it all has to do with perspective. Sure you could agree with the above statement...but you can also add that in all but very few aspects DAL pay rates exceed those of all passenger carriers. For now. Management's hair is on fire for a deal. If we reject it, we will get a better deal in 24 hours. Just like C2012. We gave way too much in unnecessary concessions and not enough gains. Let's not make the same mistake again. |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1878945)
The WS/GS analogy is bad, what if I skip the WS hoping for a GS and more trips end up in the pot!?!? Who's to say the Conpany will "up the offer" the longer we wait? How's that working for SWA, UPS, FDX?
With respect to SWA, UPS, FDX, I'd say over the long haul, it has worked exceptionally well. You've selected three of the highest paid pilot groups for the last decade or more which also have some of the strongest scope clauses. If we had the patience and fortitude they have, we may get the industry leading contract DALPA has promised. How many UPS and FedEx boxes flew on foreign carriers last year? How many more widebody captains are wearing UPS and FDX uniforms as a result of their scope. Have you ever seen a SWA airplane painted in concessionary code share colors? What percentage of passengers buying a ticket from SWA fly on SWA? How does that percentage compare to DAL? We could have those long term wins that take this from a job to a career if as a group we had the long term focus and strength to only vote YES when we really mean it. If our scope clause, pay rates, work rules, per diem, international override and retirement looked like the three companies you just pointed out, I think even Carl might vote YES. |
Vote YES for JV Concessions now, so you can avoid going to Wide Body International school later!
And just think of the fun you'll be having on the 757 replacement jet, the 737! Double the concessions, Double the Fun! WooHoo! Hey, somebody has to fly those JV International flights, might as well be somebody else! |
Originally Posted by Hawaii50
(Post 1878942)
...did you guys get full retro or partial last time?
I wish! Less than 40%. Also, nothing with regards to incentives for supporting the merger. No Stocks, no "bonus", nothing except (I believe) 25000 miles that expired before I could even use them! The union infighting, lack of Leadership at the top of ALPA and a management team that felt that they "didn't need Labor", plus a large group of pilots who were fearful.. got us 40% of retro~ We'll get them next time (LOL) Motch |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1878965)
We rejected the CDOs in the FAR 117 LOA and got a better deal in 10 minutes.
Management's hair is on fire for a deal. If we reject it, we will get a better deal in 24 hours. Just like C2012. We gave way too much in unnecessary concessions and not enough gains. Let's not make the same mistake again. |
Originally Posted by horrido27
(Post 1878984)
LOL
I wish! Less than 40%. Also, nothing with regards to incentives for supporting the merger. No Stocks, no "bonus", nothing except (I believe) 25000 miles that expired before I could even use them! The union infighting, lack of Leadership at the top of ALPA and a management team that felt that they "didn't need Labor", plus a large group of pilots who were fearful.. got us 40% of retro~ We'll get them next time (LOL) Motch |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1878986)
Actually we rearranged the deck chairs and traded the CDO's for delayed payment on the 5:15 to NOV. The CDO's were not high on the companies wish list either. The agreement reached made them very expensive.
If C2015 does not live up to the MEC's "historic" commitment, we need to reject it. We will have a new and better deal in 48 hours. Why the rush job? IDK, but I do know management is in a hurry and that is leverage. |
Originally Posted by horrido27
(Post 1878984)
LOL
I wish! Less than 40%. Also, nothing with regards to incentives for supporting the merger. No Stocks, no "bonus", nothing except (I believe) 25000 miles that expired before I could even use them! The union infighting, lack of Leadership at the top of ALPA and a management team that felt that they "didn't need Labor", plus a large group of pilots who were fearful.. got us 40% of retro~ We'll get them next time (LOL) Motch All the best to you guys. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:41 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands