With regard to what? :confused:

His "calm down bro" pix.

Thanks.

There seems to be a lot of this going on lately:

http://chzbromania.files.wordpress.c...ys-bro-owl.gif

I'm off to the "underboob vault" to find some good news.

Cheers,
ImTumbleweed

This was my impression as well.

Very well aware of scope and the lack of foresight that was had up until this point. Also very confident that an old holdover that wrote a certain article on scope in The Roar will be allowed to have nothing to do with anything with the upcoming contract (who keeps trying to run for positions).

I don't have enough time or thought process to go into the details as a family member (close to my wife though I didn't know her very well) just passed, and of course as is the pilot's curse I'm out of the country.

Exeagle,

You have got to be kidding, 10% not feasible, I hope this guy was joking. So if he does not even think we can ask for 10% what does he think is reasonable, a COLA?

I see a lot of guys say, "My minimum acceptable % pay-rate increase is xxx - which I think is also pretty unrealistic. Because how can you have a minimum acceptable pay-rate increase without knowing what the rest of the contract says? Clearly, one can only make a educated decision when taking the "whole" contract into account.

While we are discussing minimum acceptable payrate increases I have a question for anyone who knows the answer - "What exactly does minimum acceptable payrate increase mean to most guys?"

Anything less is a no vote?
You would be willing to strike over anything less?
You would be willing to walk away from the company for anything less?

I told this story before - I was flying with a CAPT who said his minimum payrate was C2000 rates. I asked him if he would strike over that. He said no. Hmmm???

All this reminds me of a line from Sean Connery's character in The Untouchables, when speaking to Kevin Costner's Elliot Ness - "What are you prepared to do about it?"

What are we prepared to do about it? What is DALPA prepared to do about it? I don't remember the time-line exactly from C2000, but shouldn't we be aggressively gearing up with strike preparedness committees and such? Or are we going to start out with a different tactic this time?

The company is not just going to give us a 35% pay-raise because we are nice guys. And if we are not willing to risk anything - I doubt we will get much.

Food for thought.

Scoop

PS - With everything I said above about the contract as a whole it would be pretty hard to make a 10% raise anything but an insult.

Agreed. The comparison had a lot of great facts. But, failed to tie it all together as a total compensation package comparison. I suspect, because that is more complex, and because they were intentionally aiming for that.

This is just one of your problems regarding credibility alfa. You say that Carl corroborated what you said? For review, here is exactly what I said:

And you believe that this statement by me corroborates your statements about many in the DPA being only interested in overturning our SLI? Incredible. I know you think you're being clever, and that nobody will be able to keep up with your cleverness. But you're only showing the weakness of your arguments. The fact you are stooping to highly parsed words means you are totally out of ideas. I think that's clear to everyone.

What troubles me is that you are either now or once was a high up DALPA insider. I worry that your fellow insiders actually fell for this when you used it on them. It's embarrassing to think of how you must look in front of management.

Good. I'm glad you've finally admitted that this is NOT the DPA's mission.

Just pointing out your lies alfa. It's not hard to do.

Excellent. I cannot encourage you strongly enough to continue making us all look stupid.

Carl

Really? You stated that many in the DPA want to overturn our SLI. As evidenced by your numerous visits to the DTW crew lounge. Please post the evidence in federal courts of this. I'll wait.

Fine. It should be all that much easier for you to find. I'll wait.

Can't wait for you to show me the evidence of my ignorance of your claims about the DPA.

Carl

Let me rephrase. I shouldn't have said "asking for." He expressed his opinion that he wouldn't expect anything more than 10%. Sorry for the wording.

That is correct...until the award is issued, the companies are combined, and management agrees to implement the award. When all those things happen, seniority is no longer negotiable. If you know of legal precedent to the contrary, post it.

That's his opinion. Many agree, and many do not. The only thing that matters is that our arbitration panel disagreed. Thus, it is now unchangeable.

It's nothing of the kind. You've posted nothing but your personal opinions.

Carl