Originally Posted by Waves (Post 790700)

By the way ACL, I'm still going to appologize to Scoop and KC when they return. I was way out of line last night. One thing you will find about me, I may be highly opinionated, but I will admit when I am defeated or when I'm wrong.

Edit: Speaking of Scoop, there you are. Sorry Scoop, I got completely carried away last night. I have since deleted that condescending post of mine.

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 790711)

One must know where leverage lies in order to exploit it.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 790543)

The first step is to determine the total budget allocated to the Delta pilot contract.

So, we now determine the total budget for the pilots. Management wants a small budget and we want a large budget. The size of that budget will be determined by several factors:

Competitive contracts throughout the industry (pattern bargaining)
Profitability of the company (yes it really matters, no matter how much anyone tries to delude themselves)

This is a business transaction, that is how the company views it, that is how the NMB views it and if you want to play in the universe of emotional outbursts (see APA) then you WILL get your clock cleaned. Badly.

So now we have gauged the economic environment and we have determined the pilot budget. Again, we try to make it as large as possible but in the end it will be a FIXED NUMBER. That is just reality.
Now we have the budget. How are we going to spend that budget? During the last few years the Delta MEC has had less money in their budget, like everyone else. Having your company go bankrupt does that sort of thing. Facing this budget cutback, they decided to spend their budget this way:

Preserve work rules and the 12-14 day work month
1 for 3.5 was critical
ALV midrange was 77 which equates to a very reasonable initial load on schedules
Vacation should still be vacation and not a cash cow to sell back
The reserve system was not designed to be "commutable" so it is not a failure that the system is not commutable
Eliminate paid time for pilots sitting at home
This is where the 23K came from
The reserve system is specifically designed to minimize reserve guarantee paid - if you hit 67 hours each month then the system is doing what it was designed to do
Keep pay rates high
That is the traditional #1 goal for Delta pilots and unless things have changed a lot recently, it still is
Leverage equity from the company to provide compensation that does not come out of the P+L statement
Our bankruptcy claim netted Delta pilots $1.2 billion
The merger equity is probably now worth about $50K + per pilot

Frankly, we accomplished all of those goals... and ended up with the best contract of all the Ch 11 carriers.

Our next contract should contain a higher budget for Delta pilots. Inside of that budget the pilots through the MEC will decide how to spend that budget. ...

There are no right or wrong answers here, there is just each pilots opinions of where the budget should be spent. It is not weakness to want higher pay rates and it is not stupid to want more time off. These are just individual preferences. You can call each other names all you want, but in the end, the pilots will express their preferences through the MEC and the MEC will develop a consensus on how to spend that budget.

If you can first get your head around the concept that the budget will be a fixed amount, then you can concentrate on deciding your priorities on how to spend that budget and avoid the emotional name calling that so often accompanies these discussions. ....By the way, you all stink. :)

Originally Posted by Hawaii50 (Post 790733)

Speaking of that, do you think we'll have any leverage to get this done on time?

Originally Posted by Ad Lib (Post 790750)

Can't believe folks on this web board were giving your post the "high five." You are making management's argument which justifies Interest Based Bargaining.

Interest Based Bargaining was dreamed up by management consultants to cap and reduce their exposure to positional bargaining. The managers realized if they threw a budget on the table, then let the union decide how to allocate it, that the union would fight amongst itself over the pot of money. Meanwhile management could step back and watch the fur fly, as senior ate junior.

Among your list of priorities you listed above the most obvious omission is SCOPE. In using your budget based approach to bargaining scope was on the table, it just wasn't a priority, so it got sold. However, the pilots never received the benefits of these "bargaining credits" because they got washed away in the subsequent deluge of bankruptcy.

Sir, IBB is a trap. It is a trap we must understand and deal with, but it is not something we should adopt in our own negotiations. Unions are more unified behind realistic positions.

It is my hope that my career progression is not again sacrificed to create credit for someone Else's budget item.

Originally Posted by Hawaii50 (Post 790733)

Speaking of that, do you think we'll have any leverage to get this done on time? I can't see the usual foot dragging going over well with this group after the bending over we've done recently. If we don't have leverage it seems that we're primed to create our own. The contract ends Dec 31 2012. The new one should be in place on 1 Jan 2013.

Originally Posted by Ad Lib (Post 790750)

Can't believe folks on this web board were giving your post the "high five." You are making management's argument which justifies Interest Based Bargaining. It sounds great coming from Ford & Harrison lawyer. I'm saddened to hear it from a pilot, despite your expert and rational presentation.

Lets look at the history of Interest Based Bargaining (IBB). Interest Based Bargaining was dreamed up by management consultants to cap and reduce their exposure to positional bargaining. The managers realized if they threw a budget on the table, then let the union decide how to allocate it, that the union would fight amongst itself over the pot of money. Meanwhile management could step back and watch the fur fly, as senior ate junior. The result of this change was a transformation from unions negotiating positions with management to internalizing those fights and negotiating with other union members. Unity was harmed in the process since now the union itself picked the winners and losers from amongst its membership. (Consider the DFR exposure United's MEC just got hit with and consider the effect of IBB practices)

Among your list of priorities you listed above the most obvious omission is SCOPE. In using your budget based approach to bargaining scope was on the table, it just wasn't a priority, so it got sold. However, the pilots never received the benefits of these "bargaining credits" because they got washed away in the subsequent deluge of bankruptcy.

Sir, IBB is a trap. It is a trap we must understand and deal with, but it is not something we should adopt in our own negotiations. Unions are more unified behind realistic positions.

It is my hope that my career progression is not again sacrificed to create credit for someone Else's budget item.

Originally Posted by Waves (Post 790765)

Your point is well taken. Pattern bargaining works fairly well when you are the low man, trying to reach parity with the high man. i.e., CAL offering DAL rates plus $1. It does not work when you are the high man, trying to be higher. I will still stand by my simplistic view that there is a finite amount of money in the bag. Our job is to discover what that max amount is, and then get it.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 790770)

Our job is to put a gun to the company's head and make them put more money in the bag.