|
From the MEC Meeting Update LOA #29 Summary: The discussions resulted in a tentative agreement on May 11, 2011. The LOA addresses 18 of the initial 25 SOT recommendations. Recommendations addressed in the LOA include : Seniority on Reserve, Bidding for CQ, Assignment to Short Call Reserve, PBS Unstacking Parameters, AE/VD/MD Conversion, Bid qualified Status for PBS Bidding, Travel to/from Training, FAR/PWA Buffers, Positive Space Off-Rotation Deadhead at beginning of Rotation, Positive Space Off-Rotation Deadhead to Hawaii, Automated PCS Changes, Same/Next Day PCS Changes, Purchase of Vacation Days, First officer removal for OE, Domestic Coverage of International Flying, Swap with the Pot, Vacation Shift, and Slide <--- fNW strikes again:rolleyes: X-day Move Rules. There are five remaining SOT items: Pre-posting of ALPA drops, Automation enhancements, Out of Base Swap Board, Rotation Construction Committee, and The Missing Week of Vacation (Last week of March) These issues may be under consideration at a later date. Personal Note: Apparently DALPA is just as bad as DAL at putting information in one easy to find place. I had to dig this info out of three documents on the ALPA website. "One Place, Someplace"... Items not mentioned: Enhanced Communication Technologies What are the Enhanced Communications Technologies that were included in*the S.O.T recommendations? These will include text and e‐mail messages that will notify you when your schedule has been changed/updated, White and Green slip awards, etc. You will be able to choose whether or not you would like to receive them. The text messages and emails will not count as official notification; you will still need to log into iCrew to acknowledge. The Company is <text deleted by me just in case...>. Calculation of Reserve Requirements (Currently being tested in limited categories) For those of you, like me, that forgot what the 18 items consisted of, see Scheduling Alert 11-02. |
Captain O******* noted that now is the time to rededicate our work to the large and meaningful issues for the Delta pilots. MEC policy issues and the internal administration of MEC business, while appropriate and important to address, need to be balanced against these greater goals. This renewed focus must be weighed on the improvement of pay, working conditions, benefits, scope and retirement for the pilot group. The focus of the MEC must turn to implementing and executing a strategic plan for Section 6. Captain O******** concluded by emphasizing that the best laid strategic plan, the strongest communications effort, and the most highly skilled professional negotiating team can only succeed if backed by a unified pilot group. |
Originally Posted by hoserpilot
(Post 995532)
Woohoo!!!!! Let's go Canucks!!!!!!
(Stanley Cup Playoffs for you Yanks...) |
Originally Posted by Nosmo King
(Post 995542)
If you can't get your own house in order to the satisfaction of the constituents, how do you expect to get their support?
At least he actually mentioned Scope - while maybe not a first, it is pretty rare to have Scope mentioned in a list of issues. Maybe the DPA drive is already having some beneficial affect. Scoop :) |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 995553)
Nosmo,
At least he actually mentioned Scope - while maybe not a first, it is pretty rare to have Scope mentioned in a list of issues. Maybe the DPA drive is already having some beneficial affect. Scoop :) |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 995490)
Well said.
All eye's to SWA to run a "no RJ's here" campaign. Or "the only airline we trust to fly you, is our own" campaign. I'll take either. I have long wondered about why they're not doing this already. It seems like really, really easy pickings for SWAs quirky advertising methodology. That copy practically writes itself. So why don't they? They certainly seem to be willing to press-to-test on other aspects of the business, like bags fly free and whatnot. The only guesses that I can come up with are: 1) They don't want to poison the well for when they'd like to use RJs. 2) It's considered a taboo subject through some kind of informal, unoffical agreement, sort of like claiming how great your safety record is, or how smooth the landings are. Take your pick. Suffice to say I predict that we NEVER see anything like this from SWA. Nu |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 995578)
Heyas FtB,
I have long wondered about why they're not doing this already. It seems like really, really easy pickings for SWAs quirky advertising methodology. That copy practically writes itself. So why don't they? They certainly seem to be willing to press-to-test on other aspects of the business, like bags fly free and whatnot. The only guesses that I can come up with are: 1) They don't want to poison the well for when they'd like to use RJs. 2) It's considered a taboo subject through some kind of informal, unoffical agreement, sort of like claiming how great your safety record is, or how smooth the landings are. Take your pick. Suffice to say I predict that we NEVER see anything like this from SWA. Nu |
|
Anyone else have a similar or different result? |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 995596)
Or their market research has shown that it's a losing issue. People may complain about RJs, but do they really avoid them?
Instead of a one line disclosure statement on a ticket stub, a passenger will look out and see an entirely different paint job/name on the aircraft. I think this would benefit ALL pilots, sure makes creating holding companies and shifting certificates around to snake around scope agreements more difficult. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:32 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands