Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Jabberwock 04-08-2011 05:40 AM


Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 977311)
It might help the DPA movement if DALPA does NOTHING.

No doubt it will. I'm seeing more DPA lanyards and stickers around anyway.

The DPA does not have a coherent, well thought, platform. But, every time ALPA frustrates the pilots it represents the DPA picks up support.

Like the old Soviet Union, ALPA will implode as a result of its own bureaucratic cardiovascular failure. (you know it starts with loss of blood flow to the extremities and ALPA's a good candidate for a Viagra prescription since Woerth) Outsourcing is the Big Mac, extra cheese, extra mayo, biggie homestyle breaded chili fries with cheese and chocolate shake that tasted good at the moment but are eventually fatal. ALPA needs to get back to basics, get it's butt on the treadmill and start working.

ALPA's still our best hope. Still wondering how to motivate them to start being a union.

So sayeth Doc Jabberwock

alfaromeo 04-08-2011 06:03 AM


Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 977165)
When Moak was MEC, and this topic came up on the DALPA forum, it was always squashed by the Comm chair. The short answer is that ALPA legal said it wasnt a violation of section 1. If you can read english, it was clearly in violation. The single carrier ruling re-opens the issue because if they are a single carrier, ALPA cannot look the other way (or say these arent the droids you are looking for).

Its one of those situations that actually makes me angry because I know I am being misled by an organization I pay to represent me. What do they think we are? Stupid? I think ALPA counts on pilot non-engagement for their existence. They also love to say to the "forum radicals" why dont you volunteer if you want change. Well many have, but they arent wanted.

Is it possible, just possible, that your legal training is somehow less stringent than the lawyers who advise ALPA? Our general counsel is considered the nation's leading expert on the RLA and is quoted by judges in their rulings. Could it be possible that you may have made a mistake in your interpretation of the language? So you claim you are misled, when in fact there is an overwhelming chance that you are just wrong, because you are not a lawyer. Seriously, what do you think when there is some delay on your flight and some lawyer comes up to the cockpit and starts bloviating about the airlines. Probably, "What a tool" is the first thing that comes to mind.

Look Carl, is just a blowhard who makes things up. ALPA has filed several grievances over Scope and will continue, WHENEVER IT IS ACTUALLY VIOLATED, not when some pilot who thinks he's a lawyer thinks it has been violated. I have no idea what the implications are of this ruling by the NMB, because I am a stupid pilot and not a lawyer, certainly not one of the most experienced, most respected labor attorneys in the country. If this changes the circumstances of our scope clause then a cease and desist letter will be sent to management and if they don't comply, a grievance will be filed.

Volunteers are always wanted, it you want to volunteer, then give me a PM and I will help you get started. Virtually every pilot who works in ALPA started out because their hair was on fire and they wanted to change the world. It's actually much tougher to change the world than it looks on the outside.

capncrunch 04-08-2011 06:36 AM

Side question:

I'm on reserve and scheduling called to tell me that the 4 day trip they have assigned me is a yellow slip. What does that mean? The 4 day is during days on so I'm not sure what the yellow slip implies. I did reduce my raw score for this month, is it associated with that? Do I get pay above guarantee?

Elvis90 04-08-2011 06:41 AM


Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 977396)
Side question:

I'm on reserve and scheduling called to tell me that the 4 day trip they have assigned me is a yellow slip. What does that mean? The 4 day is during days on so I'm not sure what the yellow slip implies. I did reduce my raw score for this month, is it associated with that? Do I get pay above guarantee?

According to the PWA, the definition of a yellow slip is:

1) A request to reduce your RAW score by 15 points.
2) A request to be first to be called on short call.
3) A request to fly on X-days.

So your case would be #1.

You don't get above guarrantee unless all your credit exceeds 70 hours. A green slip is automatically above guarantee when awarded.

ilinipilot 04-08-2011 06:42 AM

Capn crunch I had the same probem. Your yellow slip is in there until you pull it out. What that means is if any trip comes availble that you are legal to cover you will get it. I put a yellow in to pick up a trip i wanted and forgot to pull it out so once my original trip was over i got another one because the yellow was in there. Once you get what you want from the yellow pull it out or else you will keep getting trips as long as u are legal

Sink r8 04-08-2011 06:47 AM


Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 977378)
Is it possible, just possible, that your legal training is somehow less stringent than the lawyers who advise ALPA? Our general counsel is considered the nation's leading expert on the RLA and is quoted by judges in their rulings. Could it be possible that you may have made a mistake in your interpretation of the language? So you claim you are misled, when in fact there is an overwhelming chance that you are just wrong, because you are not a lawyer. Seriously, what do you think when there is some delay on your flight and some lawyer comes up to the cockpit and starts bloviating about the airlines. Probably, "What a tool" is the first thing that comes to mind.

Look Carl, is just a blowhard who makes things up. ALPA has filed several grievances over Scope and will continue, WHENEVER IT IS ACTUALLY VIOLATED, not when some pilot who thinks he's a lawyer thinks it has been violated. I have no idea what the implications are of this ruling by the NMB, because I am a stupid pilot and not a lawyer, certainly not one of the most experienced, most respected labor attorneys in the country. If this changes the circumstances of our scope clause then a cease and desist letter will be sent to management and if they don't comply, a grievance will be filed.

Volunteers are always wanted, it you want to volunteer, then give me a PM and I will help you get started. Virtually every pilot who works in ALPA started out because their hair was on fire and they wanted to change the world. It's actually much tougher to change the world than it looks on the outside.

I'm not a DPA guy, and I've generally been supportive of this MEC. I don't think Moak's the antechrist, and I don't really think National dicates our actions. I think proactively engagement the company is certainly a worthy tool. I don't think every issue that's brought up on the forum is an actual crisis.

And still, your post rings hollow with me.

I've never been super-impressed with the North's grievance count, because it tells me they were doing something wrong, but then again, I would expect us to have some disagreements with the company. It's OK to have arguments. It's OK to show you're a pilot advocate. It's OK to take on a long shot fight if the intent of the rule clearly favors your argument, even if your lawyer tells you it's not the strongest argument.

I've read some of the stuff from a couple of the "North" councils, and it's pretty obvious they live in a place where huffing and puffing and looking angry is good enough, even in the absence of results. I get that.

But why do we always have to act like a shy, shy, little girl that's embarassed she wet her bed and tries to hide in the closet so we don't get in trouble?

satchip 04-08-2011 06:48 AM


Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 977405)
I'm not a DPA guy, and I've generally been supportive of this MEC. I don't think Moak's the antechrist, and I don't really think National dicates our actions. I think proactively engagement the company is certainly a worthy tool. I don't think every issue that's brought up on the forum is an actual crisis.

And still, your post rings hollow with me.

I've never been super-impressed with the North's grievance count, because it tells me they were doing something wrong, but then again, I would expect us to have some disagreements with the company. It's OK to have arguments. It's OK to show you're a pilot advocate. It's OK to take on a long shot fight if the intent of the rule clearly favors your argument, even if your lawyer tells you it's not the strongest argument.

I've read some of the stuff from a couple of the "North" councils, and it's pretty obvious they live in a place where huffing and puffing and looking angry is good enough, even in the absence of results. I get that.

But why do we always have to act like a shy, shy, little girl that's embarassed she wet her bed and tries to hide in the closet so we don't get in trouble?

Before Christ? He's old but not that old!:D

Check Essential 04-08-2011 06:49 AM


Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 977378)
I have no idea what the implications are of this ruling by the NMB, because I am a stupid pilot and not a lawyer, certainly not one of the most experienced, most respected labor attorneys in the country.

Would that be the same most experienced, most respected labor attorneys in the country who lost ALPA's office building in the PanAm seniority lawsuit? The same ones who paid nearly a million bucks to the settle with the RJDC? The same ones who just lost mega-millions in the UAL notes lawsuit?

Cohen, Weiss and Simon along with all their former partners and offshoots are the beating heart of the dues consuming monster up there in Herndon. They bill us for tens of million$ every single year. They aren't going to do anything that might rock the boat. They are hopelessly entrenched in their mahogany paneled complacency.

Maybe we need a second opinion?

The United States government has just said that Republic is a single transportation system. Its worth a shot to see if maybe the System Board of Adjustment might agree.
If the ALPA lawyers refuse to take the case then we need to fire them and do a little outsourcing of our own.

Sink r8 04-08-2011 06:53 AM

First, we need to be able to tell "their" apart from "there". Then we can get particular about "antechrist" vs. "antichrist".

TenYearsGone 04-08-2011 06:55 AM


Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 977282)
2700 "Frontier/RAH" pilots vs 12000 Delta pilots + 7700 UAL pilots + 4700 CAL pilots + 5100 UsAir pilo... oh wait... scratch that last one.

Here is my worry. I smell a little "conflict of interest". ALPA needs dues. ALPA is currently "courting" the Republic pilots. Would Alpa go to bat for the Delta pilots (12000+) or would Alpa find a way to justify the Republic flying?

Maybe I am wrong, but I think the Republic Flying (no matter what spin you put on it) is supposed to be flown by Delta pilots.

Please stop the downward spiral of our profession. Lets work on restoration and enhancement of our work rules as our number one priority, not crewpass.

TEN


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:25 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands