|
|
Originally Posted by MoonShot
(Post 1906895)
Anything over 6B is paid the same as anything over 2.5B now. I'm assuming that is why they only go to 6.
Am really getting tired of finding things I do not like with this TA, getting really old. |
Originally Posted by blue vortex
(Post 1909065)
I am a former NW guy and I am voting yes. I have seen this show before (circa 96-98) with these guys. If we vote this down they will string us out for 3 years. We will never see the 8% from JUL 1 to the end of the year. They won't care about the contract, hell it doesn't expire for 6+ mos anyway. Southwest has been negotiating for 3 years and their mgmt. couldn't care less. RA and EB will just shut all contract talks down, we wouldn't hear from them. That is what RA did in 96 when he was the #2 guy at NW. Please don't forget RA was Lorenzo's protégé.
They only reason DL got such a fine contract in 2000 was it was on the backs of UALs work. Sure they 777 rate came first as the Delta dot, but UAL didn't want a strike and the MEC chairman orchestrated a semi-meltdown of UAL in order to secure the fantastic rates. I think we are risking a lot here for a small potential reward. I don't like the TA, but it is the best contract in the industry. UAL and AMR already have the 75% OE pull. Nothing in life is perfect, that's why I'm voting yes. I am taking the calculated, conservative approach by voting that way. I respect those who will vote note, hopefully my views will be respected here. The other pay raises are self funded with the partial loss of profit sharing (for ALL employees) and redefining the 3B4 formula to include our profit sharing, thus virtually eliminating any gain from the new TA 3B4 protection. With the measly JV payout to the BH provision bringing the company into immediate compliance, along with the sick leave, LCA cutout, etc etc there is NO WAY I can vote for this. Please look past the immediate 8% to all the concessions, and the fact that our present 3B4 gives us a portion of that pay raise. |
Originally Posted by blue vortex
(Post 1909065)
I am a former NW guy and I am voting yes. I have seen this show before (circa 96-98) with these guys. If we vote this down they will string us out for 3 years. We will never see the 8% from JUL 1 to the end of the year. They won't care about the contract, hell it doesn't expire for 6+ mos anyway. Southwest has been negotiating for 3 years and their mgmt. couldn't care less. RA and EB will just shut all contract talks down, we wouldn't hear from them. That is what RA did in 96 when he was the #2 guy at NW. Please don't forget RA was Lorenzo's protégé.
They only reason DL got such a fine contract in 2000 was it was on the backs of UALs work. Sure they 777 rate came first as the Delta dot, but UAL didn't want a strike and the MEC chairman orchestrated a semi-meltdown of UAL in order to secure the fantastic rates. I think we are risking a lot here for a small potential reward. I don't like the TA, but it is the best contract in the industry. UAL and AMR already have the 75% OE pull. Nothing in life is perfect, that's why I'm voting yes. I am taking the calculated, conservative approach by voting that way. I respect those who will vote note, hopefully my views will be respected here. Please read these letters before you cast your vote. RA might not be the bogeyman you think he is after all... http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/de...hing-else.html No way can I support this TA...Jetz |
Originally Posted by Trip7
(Post 1908550)
You forgot to mention the couple times many of us clapped for Donatelli after key points he made during his speech/rant.
I stood in the back. I saw exactly where the clapping and cheering were coming from from opposing and supporting views. The No's were clearly louder and more emotional. Some individuals were downright disrespectful. I can easily say the No's were the vocal minority. And I believe we will find that to be true on July 10th. If this TA passes, it will be a horrible precedent. It will show making a poor decision to work for DAL. And for sure I will never support or donate to ALPA PAC. If it passes, and ALPA keeps sending out Deny NAI and fight ME3 crap... Eff em. I hope DAL dumps ALPA. As a newer DAL guy, but long time ALPA pilot, this TA will make way for a crappy career at DAL. Thanks. Spin that. Please tell me what is so great about this TA. And you can not discuss section 3. Please go ahead. |
Originally Posted by blue vortex
(Post 1909065)
I am a former NW guy and I am voting yes. I have seen this show before (circa 96-98) with these guys. If we vote this down they will string us out for 3 years. We will never see the 8% from JUL 1 to the end of the year. They won't care about the contract, hell it doesn't expire for 6+ mos anyway. Southwest has been negotiating for 3 years and their mgmt. couldn't care less. RA and EB will just shut all contract talks down, we wouldn't hear from them. That is what RA did in 96 when he was the #2 guy at NW. Please don't forget RA was Lorenzo's protégé.
They only reason DL got such a fine contract in 2000 was it was on the backs of UALs work. Sure they 777 rate came first as the Delta dot, but UAL didn't want a strike and the MEC chairman orchestrated a semi-meltdown of UAL in order to secure the fantastic rates. I think we are risking a lot here for a small potential reward. I don't like the TA, but it is the best contract in the industry. UAL and AMR already have the 75% OE pull. Nothing in life is perfect, that's why I'm voting yes. I am taking the calculated, conservative approach by voting that way. I respect those who will vote note, hopefully my views will be respected here. In C2012, we achieved a 20% increase in overall net value over three years on the heels of $1B PTIX, with no help from the other “legacy” passenger carriers (not SWA, UPS, FDX) who were contractually below us, and Europe teetering on collapse. Today, Delta’s profit is over $1B per quarter, the company is giving billions back to investors and the economy is much stronger overall. While the pilot group does not expect an 80% increase in net value, they certainly expected more than 13.6% over three-and-a-half years. Especially since we got a 20% increase in C2012 (over the JCBA) when the company was only 1/5th as profitable." This was posted earlier. There is no way we should settle for this. Please vote NO. |
Originally Posted by thefoxsays
(Post 1909168)
If this TA passes, it will be a horrible precedent. It will show making a poor decision to work for DAL. And for sure I will never support or donate to ALPA PAC.
If it passes, and ALPA keeps sending out Deny NAI and fight ME3 crap... Eff em. I hope DAL dumps ALPA. As a newer DAL guy, but long time ALPA pilot, this TA will make way for a crappy career at DAL. Thanks. Spin that. Please tell me what is so great about this TA. And you can not discuss section 3. Please go ahead. If you can't separate PAC donations to fight off the foreign invaders from a TA that you may not agree with....just wow! :rolleyes: Of all the things that ALPA does, government affairs in DC is easily at the top of my list. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. I'll just have to up my donations again to carry your dead weight. |
Recently we received an ALPA email that celebrated reroute protections they just negotiated. Tonight scheduling just gave me ten hour notice of a 4:35 am van instead of a 7:00 am van. Covering a late inbound crew's flight tomorrow.
For the life of me I can not find any document on the MEC site documenting that premium pay for less that a 14 hour notice on a reroute. Does anyone know where I can find that document and its effective date? Scheduling says they know nothing about premium pay for short notice reroutes. Thanks, |
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
(Post 1908702)
My prediction... We will soon announce a financing deal to bring Skymark airlines out of bankruptcy that will fix our Haneda access problem.
|
Originally Posted by copydat
(Post 1909215)
Recently we received an ALPA email that celebrated reroute protections they just negotiated. Tonight scheduling just gave me ten hour notice of a 4:35 am van instead of a 7:00 am van. Covering a late inbound crew's flight tomorrow.
For the life of me I can not find any document on the MEC site documenting that premium pay for less that a 14 hour notice on a reroute. Does anyone know where I can find that document and its effective date? Scheduling says they know nothing about premium pay for short notice reroutes. Thanks, The language was added in the 117 LOA. I don't remember the exact number but it was last summer, LOA 14-something |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1909232)
I think you may be confusing the 14 hour thing, which requires them to run legs that are more than 14 hours in the future though trip coverage rather than reroute.
The language was added in the 117 LOA. I don't remember the exact number but it was last summer, LOA 14-something |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:41 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands