Good edits. I think the “reasonable and prudent” while undefined is probably more prudent. My original thought was to have a similar expectation to the profession standards line pilots are held to.

 

My only comment is you might want to include non-alcoholic beverages along with the food.

Denny

 

Yes, saw your well-placed intent.

Good resolution👍

 

I can see significant edits and revisions to the resolution as it passes through the various hands in the process, but indeed a policy - that reflects the seriousness of doing work on behalf of Delta pilots and the integrity and professionalism demanded of the calling - is long overdue. Such work should be considered duty time requiring the same judgement and decision making capacity as flying the line. Maybe they need to sign an FDRA (a little humor)?

Union dues should not be funding alcohol and lavish meals.

Over the years there has been a lot of bad behavior at union gatherings, much of it influenced by alcohol. There have been troubling things occurring that affect the lives of pilots. Let’s hope this is a wake up call. There is, and has been, a lot of anger. I have no dog in this fight and am a fan of neither party; however, I can’t help but wonder... the example it would set, what it might do for unity within the leadership and at large if the ATL rep were to drop, or not press charges. The offending party will pay a high cost regardless.

 

I disagree with the characterization that there has been “a lot of bad behavior at union gatherings, much of it influenced by alcohol.” Most union meetings and after hours are civil, professional, and productive. Most reps, volunteers, and attendees operate with integrity and discipline.

There are however a few outlier instances where people have made bad choices. These have heightened the need to have a policy, primarily to absolve the union of enabling such undisciplined participants of making these bad choices. Further, a few bad apples have shown that without boundaries, union dues earmarked for advancing the profession and safety have been outrageously spent on unbounded “hospitality”. If the reps and MEC work for us, it is probably wise to have a policy in place to guardrail this spending and behavior (since the leadership didn’t do this themselves). Exhibit BOD.

We are professional pilots. By and large the grownups that do union work act like adults. They don’t need an FDRA reaction. A non-overreactive resolution (I think) is the wiser decision. Set a formal policy not to use dues-for-booze, but still allow adults to return to acting like adults.

 

After that Article 8 stuff from before, do you think he, as an outgoing rep who now can't fly for 3 months, is going to turn a blind eye in the name of unity when he gets out of surgery?

 

You're correct that the OP was talking about Swap with the Pot and I got focused on personal drops. My bad. But, swap with the pot is not affected by APD holidays either. The formula in 23.v.5 is what produces the reserves required shown in DBMS. If the available is greater than the required that's all the system looks at. PWA 23.H says nothing about a swap with the pot being able to be denied if the trip to be dropped operates on an APD holiday. Only a carryout trip, i.e. asterisk rotation, can be affected if the carryout portion hits an APD holiday. Again, my bigger point is that the only thing an APD holiday can cause to not be granted is an APD. As long as reserves available is greater than reserves required they can't deny a PD or SWP simply due to an APD holiday period.

 

This part is incorrect.


23.V.5. splits into two parts, "non-holiday" (sub-para a.) and "holiday" (sub-para b.) application. Several places refer to the 23.I.10.a.Exception list of "holidays." While they may not be able to auto-deny it like with an APD, it certainly can cause a denial. (In short, swapping out of trips affected by the APD holidays have to compare day-by-day, instead of the overall amount of "negative" coverage.)



For the OP, this is moot. He's posted that PCS took his request, so: winning!

 

With the tweaks suggested, this is what I have.

Knowing that the verbiage may be altered as the resolution makes its way through the process, I am providing it to copy or model for anyone wanting to present at their own LECs. My purpose is to convey intent from the membership to address this and not have my own stamp in the policy manual. Do as you like with the document. I feel strongly about the spending and alcohol and can only do my part to help address it. I hope enough people care to show the MEC that this is more than a passing gripe, and that we need to get our house in order to proceed in a professional manner in the upcoming negotiations.



Council __ resolution

Subject: Resolution to limit hospitality suite spending and end alcohol service by DALPA

Whereas, DALPA has a fiduciary responsibility to the membership which has been in the opinion of the not been upheld.

Whereas, more transparency and better stewardship of DALPA funds provided by the membership in the form of dues is needed, evidenced by hospitality suites costs DALPA has incurred during the 2018 ALPA board of directors meeting. (in excess of $170,000)

Whereas, alcohol is suspected to have lead to behavior that is embarrassing to the organization and detrimental to the reputation of DALPA and its pilot members.

Whereas, the damage to reputation of DALPA will impair its ability to negotiate improvements to the pilot working agreement and could limit earnings or preclude enhancements to the working conditions.

Whereas, DALPA may be held liable for damages or injuries as the result of providing alcohol to persons involved in DUI, assault or other harmful actions.

Whereas, the purpose of DALPA meetings is to conduct the business of the Association, not to provide entertainment and leisure to the MEC and the administration.

Whereas, Unimpaired thinking and professional behavior is expected of pilot representatives when conducting the business of the pilot group.


Therefore be it resolved, the standards of alcohol consumption while doing DALPA business be reasonable and prudent.

And be it further resolved, that DALPA will not purchase or reimburse the purchase of alcohol or other intoxicants.

And be it further resolved, that hospitality suites be limited to providing food and non-alcoholic beverages and permit for at most a predetermined 4 hour period when individual members may consume individually purchased alcoholic beverages.

And be it further resolved, an annual accounting of hospitality suite expenses including all items and services purchased for the purpose of furnishing said suites be published to the membership. And that any exceedance of authorized funds be accounted for and approved by the MEC as a body and not by a single officer.

And be it further resolved, if these resolutions require changes to any governing policy be it known that this resolution is intent of this council to make these changes.

 

Yeah, we may as well try to get phases of the moon and planetary alignment indexes added to PWA 23 in the next contract. Wouldn't complicate it anymore than as currently written. Meanwhile, gaping holes exist in other language that allows the company to interpret whatever they want. Often aided by non-codified "gentlemen's agreements" with DALPA that fall under "that's how we've always done it". Missing a GS and getting single pay while the PWA says "made whole" comes to mind.

The icing on the cake with scheduling stuff, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, is that the average scheduler knows less about how this stuff works than my high school kid. I've been told some amazingly/exceedingly wrong info by schedulers and even scheduling supervisors...often with an attitude about it to boot.

OK, rant over. As you said, at least the OP got his SWP....despite the expert info from the scheduler he talked to. This stuff should be way, WAY simpler.