Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 932777)

It was on the left side of the Flight Operations home page, right below the hotlinks to Icrew etc. It is below the IROP memo. If I recall it is the Mexico Travel Advisory. If it not longer there, click on more. If that does not work, look on the bottom of the page under general advisories.

You are correct, though, it is a Nationwide ban on liquids over 3.5 oz. Crews included.

Originally Posted by FrankCobretti (Post 932785)

Quick question: where can I find the PBS Desktop App? Silly me, I tried the search function on DeltaNet.

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 932743)

OK, fair enough. You're correct that I should be interested in any item that would potentially improve the contract, no matter the origin. I shouldn't put any special emphasis on the NW contract, but I shouldn't exclude it either. Agreed?

You're also correct that you've seen both contracts. Chances are, we've both also lived under one or more other contracts at other airlines, and chances are, we both are aware of current contracts at other airlines, legacy or not, ALPA or not. The flip side of the fact that you lived under a NW contract that I don't know is that I lived under DAL contracts you don't know. So the flip side of the argument that a NW pilot better understands the path forward because he's seen two contracts is that we've all seen two contracts, and maybe my expertise with the Delta contracts that slowly collapsed to produce this POS might give me an insight (that you don't have) as to the few wrong turns we need to "undo" to make this good again. So maybe, from my viewpoint, I think I have more expertise and more insight into the problem. This may seem like pure heresy to you, since you feel that you know so much more, but we all know how constructive debates about heretics tend to be. So instead of arguing about who has the more pertinent expertise, can we not agree that such arguments do nothing but **** off the other group? Can we not agree that we are all subject matter experts? In that sense, can you see why I view a lot of these discussions as unproductive distractions?

So yes, it would be pretty stupid not to look into a factors that made it more rewarding at NW, or at any airline. I'm admittedly skeptical, but I'm not stuborn... so what was it that made you get more for less at NW?

Originally Posted by maddogmax (Post 932799)

Looks like 6.5% of W2 for the profit sharing check. That is unless you are former IAM or AFA then you get 3.2%. Welcome to the Delta Family. Didn't they all work for the same company in 2010?

Originally Posted by iaflyer (Post 932800)

The 3.2% is what their contracts specify. The groups that settled their representation claims and didn't file interference claims got the 6.5%. The AFA and IAM leadership made their choice.

Originally Posted by maddogmax (Post 932805)

I understand that. So they should be penalized for their right to file interference claims? It is decisions like this by the company that will make flying with mixed FA crews very unpleasant for a long lime. As they say "been there, done that"
The fnwa FA's keep hearing about the "Delta Family" yet they continue to feel like they are being treated like the "red headed step child".