Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-13-2011 | 06:16 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
This morning, I received this article in an email. For those of you who haven't seen it and are interested in perspective on conflict of interest at ALPA with regard to scope, here's a link to the article:
Who Has A Say In Our Contract
Who Has A Say In Our Contract
Couldnt have said it better!!! Support DPA!!!!!
07-13-2011 | 06:21 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
I enjoy when people come out of lurk mode. 
Bar, dont forget, giving grandma a pain pill will soon be government policy. As to dal management staying the course, outside of scope, I agree. Ignore the stock price, it's probably just down because someone figured out DALs costs are about to go up.
Especially since the DPA just got another member.
Bar, dont forget, giving grandma a pain pill will soon be government policy. As to dal management staying the course, outside of scope, I agree. Ignore the stock price, it's probably just down because someone figured out DALs costs are about to go up.
Especially since the DPA just got another member.
07-13-2011 | 06:23 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Not as I read it. The only conclusion I can come to, if the MEC chooses not to pursue RAH legally, is that the MEC is still okay with outsourcing.
07-13-2011 | 06:26 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
”Anyone who tells you otherwise is either misinformed or attempting to intentionally mislead you.”
ALPA got sued defending the right of mainline pilots to bargain exclusively. ALPA was on OUR SIDE.
The Delta and Northwest MEC's came up with scope sales on their own YEARS BEFORE the Ford / Cooksey settlement. We negotiated these deals and WE RATIFIED them.
The problem with our scope is INTERNAL. WE CREATED THIS OUTSOURCING PROBLEM BY FIGHTING UNITY AND TRYING TO CAPITALIZE ON DIS-UNITY. WE DID NOT WANT (as an MEC) TO PERFORM SMALL JET FLYING AND WE STILL DO NOT WANT TO PERFORM SMALL JET FLYING.
That is the problem. The problem is not National, it is a disagreement that guys like me have been losing for a decade here, locally. You see it going on right now with the gerrymandering of the Negotiating Committee just prior to a small jet RFP.
The DPA can't offer a solution until they correctly identify the problem. Blaming National will not change anything.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 07-13-2011 at 09:32 AM.
07-13-2011 | 06:30 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
They (same body, different people) changed Section 1 to remove the operative provisions which forced ACA / Indy Air out of DCI. That is why Republic is NOT a violation. It was, and is, intentional.
Again, I am amazed by the "I am incompetent" argument. It would be better if the MEC would man up and be outspoken on the issue instead of hiding behind questionable legal opinions and blaming others.
07-13-2011 | 06:32 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
From: CRJ200 Capt.
07-13-2011 | 06:34 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
I held out higher hopes for you than this. I guess that you are missing your ALPA work.
At least you brought me out of lurk mode. To say that the administration isn't using the policy manuel to their benefit in this instance of this NC debacle is disingenuous at best, an an outright lie all likelihood. Here are my predictions:
You will see two guys initials RH and BF run for negotiating committee. You may remember RH as the one storming out of the room when he was NOT elected chairman of a certain committee, sending the minions (defined as guys on ALPA trip drops with no title in the union) scurrying out of the room to develop a hasty contingency plan when the MEC threw them a curve ball. That left RH jobless, and BF is a rep without a council. I find it fascinating that the predominant argument against the donut crowd is "don't upset the balance so close to section 6", yet that is exactly what we are about to do.
Hey, I'm not saying that there aren't politics out there. Everything is politics. Just don't let the likes of slo, alfa, and PG tell you that this isn't.
Wanna hear more? Let's head to the national level. ALPA, the organization founded on safety, will soon have no national safety chairman position, or security chairman, or jumpseat chairman, or training chairman. These positions and responsibilities will soon be assimilated by much more qualified people: the top national officers mostly the 1st vice president. BTW, isn't it interesting that 3 of the top 6 are Delta guys? It would already be done already, except the EC summarily rejected the idea outright, forcing the national chairman to cancel the vote to change the policy manual in order to regroup, AND THEN SOLICIT INPUT FROM VARIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERS. Funny how the input wasn't requested prior to trying the forced push. Expect this to be shoved though in the very near future, if it has not already been done. There have already been some resignations from key national positions who want no part of this. Reason cited for the change: streamlining of the process and cost containment. Real reason: sidestep of key individuals who are experts in the process in order to further agendas. Result: tightening of the power group within ALPA, and less checks and balances.
There is more, oh so much more. The irony: I am not a donut person. I am an ALPA person. I am, however, in the process of reevaluation as the developments at national, trickling down to Delta, disgust me. More resignations coming. Keep watching.
At least you brought me out of lurk mode. To say that the administration isn't using the policy manuel to their benefit in this instance of this NC debacle is disingenuous at best, an an outright lie all likelihood. Here are my predictions:
You will see two guys initials RH and BF run for negotiating committee. You may remember RH as the one storming out of the room when he was NOT elected chairman of a certain committee, sending the minions (defined as guys on ALPA trip drops with no title in the union) scurrying out of the room to develop a hasty contingency plan when the MEC threw them a curve ball. That left RH jobless, and BF is a rep without a council. I find it fascinating that the predominant argument against the donut crowd is "don't upset the balance so close to section 6", yet that is exactly what we are about to do.
Hey, I'm not saying that there aren't politics out there. Everything is politics. Just don't let the likes of slo, alfa, and PG tell you that this isn't.
Wanna hear more? Let's head to the national level. ALPA, the organization founded on safety, will soon have no national safety chairman position, or security chairman, or jumpseat chairman, or training chairman. These positions and responsibilities will soon be assimilated by much more qualified people: the top national officers mostly the 1st vice president. BTW, isn't it interesting that 3 of the top 6 are Delta guys? It would already be done already, except the EC summarily rejected the idea outright, forcing the national chairman to cancel the vote to change the policy manual in order to regroup, AND THEN SOLICIT INPUT FROM VARIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERS. Funny how the input wasn't requested prior to trying the forced push. Expect this to be shoved though in the very near future, if it has not already been done. There have already been some resignations from key national positions who want no part of this. Reason cited for the change: streamlining of the process and cost containment. Real reason: sidestep of key individuals who are experts in the process in order to further agendas. Result: tightening of the power group within ALPA, and less checks and balances.
There is more, oh so much more. The irony: I am not a donut person. I am an ALPA person. I am, however, in the process of reevaluation as the developments at national, trickling down to Delta, disgust me. More resignations coming. Keep watching.
I want to go to the horsetrack with you. I think everything you said is true and will come to pass just like you said it.
Truth...its amazing what it can do.
07-13-2011 | 06:39 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
I held out higher hopes for you than this. I guess that you are missing your ALPA work.
At least you brought me out of lurk mode. To say that the administration isn't using the policy manuel to their benefit in this instance of this NC debacle is disingenuous at best, an an outright lie all likelihood. Here are my predictions:
You will see two guys initials RH and BF run for negotiating committee. You may remember RH as the one storming out of the room when he was NOT elected chairman of a certain committee, sending the minions (defined as guys on ALPA trip drops with no title in the union) scurrying out of the room to develop a hasty contingency plan when the MEC threw them a curve ball. That left RH jobless, and BF is a rep without a council. I find it fascinating that the predominant argument against the donut crowd is "don't upset the balance so close to section 6", yet that is exactly what we are about to do.
Hey, I'm not saying that there aren't politics out there. Everything is politics. Just don't let the likes of slo, alfa, and PG tell you that this isn't.
Wanna hear more? Let's head to the national level. ALPA, the organization founded on safety, will soon have no national safety chairman position, or security chairman, or jumpseat chairman, or training chairman. These positions and responsibilities will soon be assimilated by much more qualified people: the top national officers mostly the 1st vice president. BTW, isn't it interesting that 3 of the top 6 are Delta guys? It would already be done already, except the EC summarily rejected the idea outright, forcing the national chairman to cancel the vote to change the policy manual in order to regroup, AND THEN SOLICIT INPUT FROM VARIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERS. Funny how the input wasn't requested prior to trying the forced push. Expect this to be shoved though in the very near future, if it has not already been done. There have already been some resignations from key national positions who want no part of this. Reason cited for the change: streamlining of the process and cost containment. Real reason: sidestep of key individuals who are experts in the process in order to further agendas. Result: tightening of the power group within ALPA, and less checks and balances.
There is more, oh so much more. The irony: I am not a donut person. I am an ALPA person. I am, however, in the process of reevaluation as the developments at national, trickling down to Delta, disgust me. More resignations coming. Keep watching.
At least you brought me out of lurk mode. To say that the administration isn't using the policy manuel to their benefit in this instance of this NC debacle is disingenuous at best, an an outright lie all likelihood. Here are my predictions:
You will see two guys initials RH and BF run for negotiating committee. You may remember RH as the one storming out of the room when he was NOT elected chairman of a certain committee, sending the minions (defined as guys on ALPA trip drops with no title in the union) scurrying out of the room to develop a hasty contingency plan when the MEC threw them a curve ball. That left RH jobless, and BF is a rep without a council. I find it fascinating that the predominant argument against the donut crowd is "don't upset the balance so close to section 6", yet that is exactly what we are about to do.
Hey, I'm not saying that there aren't politics out there. Everything is politics. Just don't let the likes of slo, alfa, and PG tell you that this isn't.
Wanna hear more? Let's head to the national level. ALPA, the organization founded on safety, will soon have no national safety chairman position, or security chairman, or jumpseat chairman, or training chairman. These positions and responsibilities will soon be assimilated by much more qualified people: the top national officers mostly the 1st vice president. BTW, isn't it interesting that 3 of the top 6 are Delta guys? It would already be done already, except the EC summarily rejected the idea outright, forcing the national chairman to cancel the vote to change the policy manual in order to regroup, AND THEN SOLICIT INPUT FROM VARIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERS. Funny how the input wasn't requested prior to trying the forced push. Expect this to be shoved though in the very near future, if it has not already been done. There have already been some resignations from key national positions who want no part of this. Reason cited for the change: streamlining of the process and cost containment. Real reason: sidestep of key individuals who are experts in the process in order to further agendas. Result: tightening of the power group within ALPA, and less checks and balances.
There is more, oh so much more. The irony: I am not a donut person. I am an ALPA person. I am, however, in the process of reevaluation as the developments at national, trickling down to Delta, disgust me. More resignations coming. Keep watching.
What you state is what I have heard is going on. A huge mistake IMO. On the DALPA level, there are tons of Chairs and Vice Chairs really fed up, but quitting is not the answer either. To make sustainable change this group needs to stand up and fight, hold their reps accountable, and remove them when necessary.
Bar, read the policy manual again. As I read it, wrt to the NC, it is very suggestive and not directive. A Conference call of reaffirmation would have sufficed.
07-13-2011 | 07:00 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
From: A-320/A
This morning, I received this article in an email. For those of you who haven't seen it and are interested in perspective on conflict of interest at ALPA with regard to scope, here's a link to the article:
Who Has A Say In Our Contract
Who Has A Say In Our Contract
07-13-2011 | 07:14 AM
Banned
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
Bingo. We need to deal with this or we will be in real trouble within five years. Part of the problem is all of these agents are over worked. I would put two at each gate. It always impresses me how smoothly the operations overseas run. Two to three agents at the gate, and all issues are dealt with quickly and with respect.
Last edited by Jesse; 07-13-2011 at 07:40 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
