Exactly - for example, with the Air France JV, I wish they would of come out with something saying "we're giving up flights from JFK-CDG and other stuff, but we're getting:

a) slots in LHR with flying for those slots
b) SLC-CDG
c) PIT-CDG and
d) PHL-CDG.

A is a loss of pilots, but a<b+c+d + slots so it is a net positive for us.

What's so hard about putting that in a memo? If all the MEC does is wave their hand and say "don't worry, it's good for Delta, and we'll get the money from the company at negotiations" I feel like it's not going to happen.

Remember Moak said we now have to grab what we can in small increments all along- that has been repeated from the "unionoids" (:D) all along. I would like to see a bit better strategy than the above. "We'll get something later if we agree to this" is not a sound motive of operation.

They can certainly capture something from this JV deal as well. The company knows it's very beneficial to having us on board.

Heck, look at how WN operated for so many years knowing that they needed their employees on board. That has been a tremendous factor to their success... and now they make more than us (a large part of that is due to our bankruptcies...but still)

Anyhoo.. time to go watch "up!" with my parents! Had a very airline thanksgiving this weekend.

I'm sure there are some substantial legal issues to dance around, but if you believe it's important, and you realize good stewardship is nothing without good marketing, then you put together some decent communication skills, and you express yourself for the common good.

It's not easy, and it's not simple, but it sure would be nice if this MEC realized actions don't speak very loud, if not accompanied by words. Some of these plays simply move too fast for the crappy narrative...

and I want instant replays.

..........................

Hi Ferd,

I think where we go from here is that we either get this MEC to improve the marketing department, or it collapses into what you described. I don't think their approach is bad, and I think sensible attitudes are OK, but only if you make a convincing argument in support thereof.

They're facing angry mobs with pitchforks and torches, and they think it's OK to simply do what they perceive to be the right thing. As a person who thinks they are generally capable, I am disappointed (sometimes disgusted) at their poor communication. It's like wtaching a smug nerd turn in his paper on time, but refusing to help the rest of the class understand the answer.

Even my rep, when I give him hell, doesn't quite understand why he can't effect a change in our communciation "effort".

DALPA MUST communicate more effectively, or it will leave the door wide-open for people that talk that good game. And a basket case we will become.

Does anyone know exactly how BIG the "proposed" Guam base will be?

Mob,

Just got back from "over there". The mechanic on Saipan is a real interesting guy who is setting himself up to be THE GUY out in that part of the world.

His impression...........he is sending his guys to 737 school, and he wouldnt be doing that without some positive knowledge it wasn't a waste of money. However, he said he hadn't heard of anything more than Guam having 737s needing to be worked on. Just like Guam and Saipan having 757s to work on.

Yes, I know, slightly better than a friend of a FA who knows a guy at Target. But, you have to know this guy. He keeps his ear to the ground.

Ferd

Why would a few gains here and there destroy the master plan?
This "support" for everything management wants is getting pretty one-sided.

(I'm just saying)

No time for a longer post. My union wants me to lobby the government in support of management's LaGuardia slot swap thing. "Win in New York".
Then I gotta go study the new Phase of Flight Integration procedures more carefully because my MEC Safety Committee sent me a memo saying FOs are getting confused and overloaded and management needs that quick SOC and we couldn't possibly slow down management's timetable.
Title of the memo? "Cooperate and Aviate". I don't make this stuff up.

If you read my posts, I think you will realize that I am in the camp of getting decent gains now and not waiting. I am not worried about destroying the deals to the point of paralysis.

I have suggested a percentage of the revenue, on top of guarantees of a percentage of the flying; min number plus at least 50% of the growth, plus 2-5% of the revenue, not profit. I am assuming this would be in the ballpark of 10 billion a year plus. Just a guess though.

What I was stating above what my hypothesis as to why we are not going for greater gains in other areas as well as a 50-50 split on the flying.

I agree, I am just stating my best guess. Why else would not be fighting for gains every chance we got.

I am sure we will be told they tried, but that it was not possible, but in reality the company needs us on board to do a lot of the things they have done over the last two years. We have willfully cooperated to the point of creating the easiest and quickest merger in history.
IMHO the stock and pay bumps were good, but it could have been better. I know I am an ungrateful person:eek:

The AF JV should have gotten a few goodies, and this one should get cash, and scope tightening to name a few.