Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1021726)

I have not thrown in my DPA card yet. But I think ALPA National wallows in it's conflict of interest and DALPA, the good soldier, seems to tell us talking about scope is giving away bargaining position. To which I wonder, if you don't want to say it's not on the table then you're saying it's on the table. It's only natural we might move towards a substitute given the system and it's direction. I believe the notion of doing so is something the cool kids call, a whipsaw?

QUOTE]


Send in your card. You have nothing to lose. When the vote comes down the road, that is the time that the decision really has to be made. It's like a job interview. You really don't have to make a choice until the position is offered to you. Seriously, why NOT send a shot across the bow of ALPA?!?! Only good can come from that. What, you have friends at ALPA National that might be offended? Screw that. This is business and they have been performing poorly.

A few months ago I was deadheading out of PNS (as I recall) at o'dark thirty and a couple of ALPA bigwigs were put next to me on the flight. I don't remember their names, but I have seen their mustached faces in the monthly mag. I only wanted to catch a nap before my long day really got started, but they were proud to introduce themselves to me as so and so of ALPA, as if I should have known them by sight. They then asked me what I thought of the transition to DAL as I'd only been here about 3 years. In a very positive manner I outlined how much better DAL was than my previous employer. However, I did bring up a few sticking points as I've been a union member for a good while if you include my previous life. The few semi-negative comments I made were met boldly with the "talk to your reps" response. In other words, I felt they could have given two *******s about what I had to say. It was like water off a duck's back.

Send in your card. Talk to your friends within the pilot group and convince them to do the same. Take it to the streets.

Originally Posted by FlyZ (Post 1021681)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy

I am completely confident DALPA will not open the door further, and perhaps may even close it a bit.

^^^^^^^^^
PG, Do you still stand by your prediction that DALPA will not open the scope door further and may even close it a bit?

Alfa, Slow, and Sailing, we never heard from you on this. Please help us sleep better at night by giving us some peace of mind. Tell us scope is not on the table.

V/R,
FlyZ

Originally Posted by JobHopper (Post 1021688)

I asked someone very high up the ALPA food chain what the heck is really going on. He explained the Negotiating Committee is the only DALPA committee elected by the MEC; all the others are appointed by TO. The NC does NOT report to TO; they work for, and take direction from, the MEC. He is not happy about this lack of control. Hence, he is trying to recall them.

This is a page right out of LM's playbook. Whether it is good or bad depends, I guess, on whether or not you share TO's vision. Personally, I don't know since I have no fu*@#ing idea what his vision is. Anyone who does, please feel free to post it here.

What it will do is remove the reps from the picture and place the NC under one man's agenda. So much for "talk to your rep", "get involved" and "work within the system." Lots of luck with all of that.

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1021693)

With the exception whether or not you actually had a conversation (I can't verify that), not one word of what you've written is factually correct.

The Merger Committee and Pilot Director are also elected by the MEC. The MEC Chairman is an ex officio member of the Negotiating Committee. There is no attempt at recall, there is an election as called for in the Delta MEC policy manual.

Why would you or your "high up in the food chain" insider spread stuff like this? Does it help you on a path to get a better contract?

Just a suggestion, but you might want to check your sources.

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1021712)

But inexchange for that.......how much will WE have to give up? You can't have both, right? I am expecting DALPA to say we can either have more pay (hopefully SWA+ for our 737s), OR we can have no increase in our scope allowance. Notice no TIGHTENING of scope, just no loosening of scope. Cryptic, but expected. How about RESTORATION? We are a bargain. Come on slow, say it..."help me help YOU."

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1021352)

That and I thought a decision would be out by now on RAH, where is that?

Originally Posted by Flybywine (Post 1021374)

You are greatly overestimating the efficacy of your union reps, as well as the communication chain between them, Compass management, and finally down to Cpz line pilots. IF Compass management actually received a complaint about PA's referring to "Delta" not followed by the (willfully deceptive) addendum "Connection", they wouldn't care. And if they cared, they would take so long to communicate (if they remembered at all) a reproach to the offending crews that the force of the point would be lost. The same, I'm afraid to say, would be likely be true if this complaint would be carried through strictly Union channels.

Originally Posted by JABDIP (Post 1021488)

Stock in the crapper. Hit 52 week low of 8.56.????:eek:

Originally Posted by sinca3 (Post 1021517)

Yeah I noticed that along with it disappearing from DeltaNet. Things that make you go hmmm?
On another note, just flew with my first FNWA brother...you guys aren't so bad :D
He was over 60 with no intention of leaving until 65 :(
We did have two different whale drivers jump seating, one took the early leave. The other mentioned that out if the 190ish early out letters 34 (or did he say 44?) were 744 guys. That will create some movement!
Cheers

Originally Posted by georgetg (Post 1021570)

If the same lawyer team that helped craft Section 1 now advises us that the language is weak, something is amiss....

Either:

• The original lawyers did a poor job
• The current lawyers aren't good enough to get results
• There is a lack of interest in pursuing legal action

I want to know which it is and why.


Cheers
George