Last time around Delta hired, early in basic indoc eveyone had to sign a letter to their former employers giving up any recall rights or any ability to retain a flying job at another company. I'd guess it would be the same this time.

The military folks did not have to give up any rights to fly in the reserves, of course.

Hiring website changed again

Delta - Pilot Basics

Better reflects the first page. Removed all the aircraft references.

Has anyone bumped into BB recently?
I wonder if he has been "activated". He has some other job within the company now doesn't he?

Last I heard he was working on SOC stuff for the NWA guys. It has been some time though.

What? No more humping lizards?:p

It appears that the joke has worn off. I instead put a shiny new jet up......

The joke has not worn off.

But, I can understand if you have to bring it down but I think when you're in a heated argument about scope (i.e. somebody getting screwed over) you ought to bring it back up there.

The problem is that they and the rest of the Moak team continue to operate under the philosophy that its their job to help management make Delta Air Lines profitable. The Moak administration has put the needs of management ahead of, or at least on par with, those of the pilots.
Some of that is fine. I'm all for a cooperative relationship. But its gotten out of balance. The MEC has started to think like management. They view our contractual rights as a "cost". As something that only hinders the corporation in its quest for world domination.
Now they're on this website starting to soften up the audience for the next secret LOA or JV or whatever, to accomodate "shared flying" with JAL. They predict doom and gloom if we don't go along.
They may be right. (although I'm not entirely convinced). But if we are going to be taking all these risks in partnership with management then we should also share in the rewards. Its time for some financial restoration.

This JAL deal better include some money for the pilots. Its pretty obvious we aren't bankrupt anymore if we've got the resources to finance Japan Airlines' restructuring. We shouldn't have to wait another 3-5 years to get some improvements to our bankruptcy pay rates.

I hope the MEC will remember who they represent in this negotiation.
Quit explaining to me why the corporation needs this and that from the pilots.
Start explaining to the corporation why the pilots need some things from them.

Sorry for the temporary drift because Check is feugo but:

747-800 is out of the shop:
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/image.php?id=2635

That's a sharp plane.

I wouldn't be surprised if it flew before the 787

Cheers
George

you're probably right

Whoa, there...where's the spite? Where have I told you that you're wrong? The world is changing, and you acknowledge that. We must either adapt to the real world circumstances or risk the Darwinian consequences of the failure to adapt. I posed some possible (even probable in some circles) scenarios to you. You answered with demands and wants. I asked you again how you get there from here. You respond

"The pilots of DAL want a win, and do not want to see more of their flying dolled out to other entities."

I want a win, too. I've asked for your suggestion on how we get there. You haven't given one other than throw our weight around. That we "deserve" something.

While you may view it as a simple request, it doesn't have a simple answer. You know that. Tell me how the Japanese bilateral is going to turn out. Tell me about Haneda access. Tell me about JAL's future health and scope after their restructuring. Tell me about the Japanese and US economy next year. Tell me about the price of oil over the next 5 years.

Then I'll give you a simple answer.

Far from it. See above.

Please go back to the main point. What if those existing jobs are under threat from all the forces listed above. What if there was a way to preserve all those jobs? What if only some of those jobs are economically viable, a la Frankfurt? btw, I didn't talk to people about what happened there, I lived it.

Here's the MEC mission statement:
“To reverse the decline, stabilize and improve the pay, working conditions, retirement, benefits and job security of the Delta Pilots; to always be mindful of Safety and Security.”

Everything the MEC does is guided by that statement. Whether the Japanese bilateral stands as currently written, is traded away by our government for a false "open skies" or our competitors are allowed access to Haneda with their coalition partners while Delta is frozen out, you can expect the MEC to adapt as directed by their mission statement above. To quote another writer, it's real simple.

The Starship Enterprise just might fly before the 787. :)

Scoop

I am sorry, but this is just a bunch of baloney. If you look at our contract in bankruptcy, our bankruptcy returns, our stock from the merger, and our contract gains in the merger, can you find any other pilot group that came out of this better off than we did? Do you think that management just gave that up easily? How about the shareholders?

We took 13% of the company coming out of bankruptcy. 13%. $1.3 billion when we sold it. What do you think the other creditors said when they saw that figure? Do you think they said "oh gee, they are nice fellows, let's give that up" or do you think they all took a massive dump simultaneously which probably dropped the water pressure in New York for a while? They treated that claim like we were stealing their children.

So we sell our stock at the equivalent of $25 a share to a bunch of big time investors, and the stock has NEVER sold for a price higher than that. Now the merger comes along and we say to those same guys, "hey we want 5.5% of the company back from you." What do you think the reaction to that was? They were laughing at us until we got the stock and then they were hated us.

If you remember, NW and the NW pilots were the leaders in establishing a joint venture. The match with KLM allowed them to fly from a bunch of non hub cities to AMS, routes they could never justify without the joint venture. Look at PIT-CDG and PHL-CDG, we could never fly those routes without our joint venture with Air France. Heck, CVG-CDG would probably be gone without it.

The key to the joint venture is to avoid getting caught as the domestic only partner. Since our code share with Air France, our international flying has increased dramatically, some of it due to the code share, some of it not. The Delta MEC has led the way in creating a mutual support arrangement with the KLM/Air France unions and getting that mutual support written into our contract. That is not in management's interest, that is in the Delta pilots' interest.

If we develop a JV with JAL, then you will probably see the same evolution. First, the MEC will travel to Tokyo for a meeting with the JAL pilots. Sometime they will travel to the US and meet with our MEC. Next, we will get involved into the corporate agreement between the two sides from the very beginning so that we can ensure our interests are considered from step 1. Finally, we will negotiate Joint Venture language into our contract which will ensure that growth is shared between the two groups. Most likely, along the way, people like you will claim this is all concessionary. Right up until we start adding flights to Haneda.

If you have any questions, ask Hauenstein if our international footprint would grow or shrink without the AF/KLM joint venture. He will state unequivocally that it would shrink. Our domestic system would take a hit also, primarily in gauge. Glen does not get involved in pilot negotiations so he just says what he thinks.

A joint venture can be a gain for the company and a loss for the pilots. It can also be a gain for both. We have managed the AF/KLM joint venture so that is has benefited both. I am pretty sure a JAL joint venture would be the same thing.

In January, less than 3 years from bankruptcy, we will pretty much have the best contract amongst the network carriers. How did that happen?

Here it is in a nutshell:

“To reverse the decline, stabilize and improve the pay, working conditions, retirement, benefits and job security of the Delta Pilots; to always be mindful of Safety and Security.”

What does this mean exactly?

Does anyone know what management needs from us to make this deal happen? And if so, they are already making offers that would commit the Corporation to a plan of action. Does this mean they already have (or don't need) our agreement?

If we're paying a Billion to add a codeshare partner which also cuts American off at the knees, so be it. If we're going to outsource our feed in a Country where we have 5th freedom rights, that's another.

Based on those in the know, this is all about gaining & maintaining access in Haneda.

If anyone cares to remember, I wrote that NRT was not that much of a crown jewel. Not only does the new airport reduce NRT's relevance, but the 787 and similar aircraft make connecting less of a necessity. The 767 drastically reduced the need for hubbing to 747's over the Atlantic. The 787 will hit the 747 and the 777 in the same fashion over the Pacific.

ACL jumps on me for not responding quickly enough and you say that I'm spending too much time here. Would you guys get together and work it out for me?:p

Just another anonymous webboard pseudonym fighting for truth on the internet!;)

If you have any questions, ask Hauenstein if our international footprint would grow or shrink without the AF/KLM joint venture. He will state unequivocally that it would shrink. Our domestic system would take a hit also, primarily in gauge. Glen does not get involved in pilot negotiations so he just says what he thinks.


Alfa,

Not disagreeing with the first 2 sentences above but I think it is a little naive to think that he just says what he thinks and "darn" the consequences. (The last seemed implied to me.)

Denny

Slow,

This is not a plan, it is a goal. What's the plan to get to the goal?

Denny

Plenty of times. Many times thorough inference. Let say you don't that is good!
My suggestions are real simple. Give management bookends that we are willing to do. High and absolute mins that we will accept for this deal to be done. It is their bidding to do not ours. We cannot sit at the table and do this deal for them. What we can do is tell them that for a JV to look like A, we will be X, for it to look like B, we will need it to look like Y, for it to look like C, we will need it to look like Z. I am sure as the day is long that the set of circumstances are dynamic, and I agree that putting blanket demands on the talks and or deals would hinder. As I stated before, bookends (top and min acceptable outcomes) Adapting to the new world does not mean we need to see the farm. We have the coveted access to the board, and have a vote. DALPA knows exactly what is going on and with these bookends in place can help craft on the fly a very good outcome for the pilots. That is like you say DALPA's mission statement.

What I would suggest as a layman looking at the playing field is this. JAL, and the Japanese government are looking for a way to pull JAL and the Japanese government's money out of hot water. Suffice to say, if AMR was the answer it would have been done. My take away today is that both of those parties want the Skyteam alliance.
We are a huge party to making this happen. We have the ability to make the company offer their employees that will be out of work jobs, not just pilots but ramp workers, ticket agents, et al. We will also offer employment to their employees as we take over some of their shed routes. We off JAL to join the Skyteam immediately, and start interline ticketing up in 60 days or less. We offer their contract pilot preferential employment opportunities here at DAL, most are expats, we offer with the access of Haneda dropping out complaint of open skies. We offer money on a graduated scale to JAL's revenue stream. We offer preferred access for their customer to our lounges, and rewards programs. We as a company make the deal sweet enough that the company has a positive revenue stream with this deal. This deal has a lot of danger attached to it. JAL is sick, and a simple cash infusion is not the end all be all. There is some major viability for the Skyteam partners and us as pilots with going along with this deal. Log term it is good, sort term it could be ugly.

One last thing, we get right of first refusal on all of their gates, planes and routes.

There you go again. My simple answer is allow the company to obtain the deal as they choose, but with the understanding that we want like I said a min of a, b, c to allow this to happen. I also feel very strongly that for us to complete this JV it will be good for the company. Money wise it will be real good in a few years. I want some of that in my and your pocket. Give them the access they want, let it go 50-50 if it has to to appease the Japanese government, but make it known that we DALPA want paid directly to our pilots a percentage of the revenue/profit stream from the deal. That is our blood money for doing it. How much was AF again? How many billions? Even 10% of that is a ton of money for us. The neat part about that is that that deal is totally independent of the deal they do with JAL or the Japanese government. It is between our company and us.
That is a suggestion that allows the company to get their deal and for us to maintain our flying and get some positive return for our cooperation.

As for Haneda. I stated that one way or another we will have some access. The Japanese are hard bargainers and will eek everything they can from us. Showing that we have to have this no matter what, really shows our hand in the whole game. They want us, but to me it appears we may have given them the upper hand.
My input to the mec is simple. Do not create a deal that will have loopholes in it. Build upon the inclusiveness of the AF deal. Make the deal graduated that if they do A we get B, if C happens we get D. A blanket agreement generally only works for day 1.


Great, I am glad you did, and you should realize and agree that DAL mismanaged Frankfurt.
What jobs are you referring to? Our or JAL's?
I would like us to promote our jobs. If we can save their jobs that is great for unity. Make their pilots DAL pilots. How is that for unity!


I am sure it is guided by that statement, but the simple fact is that this needs to be good for us. Not neutral. I understand the world is changing, and we are adapting. We are in a truly unique situation with JAL. It would be great if we could make it happen. I truly understand the importance of it. We need to be greedy to a point. I agree with that, but we need to make it benefit us. We can have both. For that I am sure.

I am sure that us bending over and giving the farm will not change the money side of it one way or another. Politically the jobs are important for the Japanese government, but they see green like everyone else. I would love to save those jobs, and make em DAL jobs. Take the people. This time lets not fire them like we did in FRA. (we still had to pay them, one point that many did not realize until after the fact)
Lets practice unity and make them us. As many of their employees as we can. Lets give the new Japanese government a political win in this down turn. In turn lets make this deal really good for DAL and its pilots.

I am not against you. I am against the idea of trying to manage expectations. That has got to stop.

Jmo, but your writing says otherwise.

If you call interjecting facts, scenarios, and real world possibilities into a debate that heretofore had been filled with "hopium" managing expectations, then I'm guilty. I don't apologize for that.

There was also the simple fact that we had given in LOA 46. The claim was as good as it was because all things considered the pension was no that underfunded.
I agree most of this. I think that it is in managements interest to make it beneficial to us as well. There is only so much blood in a turnip, and the simple fact is that there needed to be some give back, no matter how larger or small one may feel it is or was.

We have had some great international growth. Much of that push started prior to the AF/DAL JV deal. I also agree that we are getting feed from their feed and vice versa. It is good for both corporate parties. We get some job protection, but like I suggest for the JAL JV we need to get part of that increased revenue stream.
Good and lets make sure that as the company and group that is saving this airline we get some positives for us. I would love for their contracted work to be brought in house. That is a small request for helping this airline and their government.
Correct as we would not fill all of our seats. It is part of the reason that the small RJ lift does not work anymore either. A point is that this is good for the company and for us but marginally. We need to see better gains from this type of deal. Money, jobs, along with the security that the venture may add
Let make it benefit us more. Lets get some improvements. We are after all a risk sharing partner in these deals.
It happened because of a few things. One was a need or desire for a merger. We got something from it. I still think that AMR is doing really well considering they are still under their concessionary agreement. Yes, that may change, but for now apples to apples. CAL sold the farm to keep their pensions. We sold our pensions to keep a few other things. NWA sold a bunch of stuff to keep their pensions.

We got a percentage of the company, which is great. We on the South side got 17% over four year. Not great, but not bad. We agreed to leave scope on small jets where it is, and that is the one place I think we could have seen gains on in the JPWA.....

To do what the company wanted to do with NWA required our corporation. We gave it, and have done a great job to date. We will continue to succeed for this company. We are professionals it is what we do. What most pilots want is a quicker return to better wages and rules. With all of these JV's and code share agreements that make the company stronger, the average line joe sees many occasions where we could be doing it quicker than we are. That in a nut shell is the point.
We need to care where others are, but a few more percentage points will not hinder the plan.

If DAL gets married up with JAL, I'd expect a rapid merger/sale of United's asia op to either CAL or AA and then a CAL / AA merger. Yeah, yeah I hear you all saying no way.

While I cannot see far enough around that corner to tell whether it would be good or bad in the law of unintended consequences dept. I'd guess it would certainly be a consequence.

At the end of the "chess game" Haneda access is the critical treaty permission. Whether or not we get a piece of that action tells you if our gov't negotiators are idiots or not.

DALPA in this business transaction is definitely not in a position to dictate, because AF/KLM are a financing stream. However, DALPA should be able to get some bennies as a result - lots of cheap/free contract improvements plus some stock (not held back)

Discuss

Scambo

What I do not like is being told we can't do that.

telling the group there is no way to get anything and we would be lucky to get the access, imo is plain wrong. We are past 1113C and it is time to get some gains. That is my point.

I have no problem with facts. You threw a scenario out there with maybe oil here, maybe there, maybe access, maybe no, save jobs, but who's, growth but for whom?

All great questions but please finish the thoughts. If you can't because of the NDA then fine. But state that.
Tell me what you know, what you hear the Japanese are doing saying or thinking, and I will give you a relative and rational response. What you have stated is that they have all the cookies and the recipe, which they do not. We have the money and the access that Oneworld does not. That is huge, and the linchpin to all of this.

My point is that we need a quid pro quo. I like a percentage of the revenue DAL gets from in myself.

Really?
You answer criticism that you're too cozy with managment by telling me to go ask management if you've been doing the right thing?
I'm sure Hauenstein would tell me that this MEC has played a vital role in the growth of our "international footprint". I'm sure he thinks the Joint Ventures have been a great success and a huge revenue generator.

I've got my own expert right here at the house though. I don't need "Glen". --->

"Honey, how's this MEC been doing on revenue generation for payment of our mortgage and the growth of our kids' college fund?"

My expert says, "not so good".

Does our MEC maintain regular contact with the pilot reps at the other Sky Team partners?

I ask this because a buddy of mine is the FO rep for ANA and travels multiple times a year to meet with the other Star Alliance reps...

Cheers
George

I am sure it has been good for the company. Simple fact is that the AF deal bring in a ton of money for the company. It also need to bring in a ton of money for us. That is what we need to shoot for a percentage of the revenue. That is real dollars that are on a 10-K that cannot be altered. It can be a smaller percentage than we would get with the profit, but any money to our pockets is a good thing.

Currently we might be getting bigger gauged jets on MCI-ATL ;) That is real money but it is not as much as it should be.

I know Slow, I am just plain unrealistic, but heck someone needs to fight for this group at every juncture. Try asking and see what you get. The company wants this. Threats of doom worked before, we made it through any way. Lets get something for the boys!

You write about things that you were not here for and through those writings you show you know nothing about them.

The ALPA Claim had nothing to do with the pension. If the pension had been preserved, the Claim would have still been paid. The number was the same. You weren't a Delta pilot when it was paid out.

The pension was grossly underfunded (about 38% at termination) and according to PBGC will cost them $900 million of their money. It will cost the plan participants (the guys who were actually here and had real losses) a lot more than that.

The pension was terminated because it met the standards for termination. A qualified ERISA benefit cannot be negotiated away. Your assertion is insulting to those that worked so hard to make sure you had a company to come to work for.

Oh, and the JCBA tightened small jet scope. You know that. If you added up the total number of NWA and DAL permitted aircraft, it was far greater than the 255 limit.

So please, how about sticking to facts. All these facts have been clearly presented in official Court and ALPA publications.

Now back to your regularly scheduled "I want more" Latest and Greatest...:p

Yes, a few times a year!

Yes. A Delta pilot is the current President of the SkyTeam Pilots Association (SPA). They meet regularly. We have an even closer relationship with Air France ALPA and the VNV from KLM.

One of the competitive advantages that SkyTeam has in the current Japanese fight (bilateral/open skies, Haneda, and JAL) is that SPA is a proponent of greater access and has a track record between the companies and labor to prove they can make it work for all parties. APA has opposed antitrust immunity with BA and JAL. OneWorld is suffering as a result. The Japanese by culture are very loyal, however, so AMR has a signficant advantage in what should be a dollars and cents decision on JAL. The US Government has significant financial and military needs outside of the airline industry, so they may be negotiating away our jobs for us on the bilateral.

So we aren't allowed to talk about anything on here we weren't around for?



By the way, did you not see the dripping irony in you criticizing acl on "articulating a want" instead of a plan....and then posted the mission statement without any details or facts in regards of how to accomplish it like you so arrogantly puff yourself up with in every post.

how is "I want more" in any way shape or form different than

I read that latter statement as "I want more of everything" am I wrong?

Cheers
George

Good news Slow!
I'm always interested in learning more about all the work that is done on behalf of the Delta pilots.

Cheers
George

It only counts as gospel and truth if slowplay or one of the other unionoids post it. ;)

He just doesn't handle it very well when he's away from the message board that he controls...

My god slow the whole post was generalizations. I know the difference. But thank you for pointing them out.

As for the pension, at termination yes, because all of the early outs. A longer payout period for the company would have solved that. I am not going to start splitting hairs on this crud. You just pick and choose what to respond to.

You wanted some to the point stuff for the JAL JV and I gave it. How about, wow ACL those are some good ideas instead of the normal managing of expectations, or as you like to call it interjecting fact!

Why does our union get so mad at us? Maybe our 2.5% isn't enough to warrant permission to question.

Now that's deep.

Just another example of euphamistic, vacuous, and absolutely worthless tripe posted by a union shill.

My dues are paying for this?

I just never feel the love from you, CLMP!:(

If you ever want to play poker, let me know. I'll deal your cards face up!:D