Can you give me some examples? The most "buddy-buddy" relationship in our industry is SWA. They've got passenger industry leading rates of pay, so it doesn't seem to hurt them. FedEx now has a pretty good relationship with their management. Their compensation is top of the heap and they're currently hiring.

Carl will point to UPS as an example of a successful adversarial relationship. They have pilots on furlough, a reported tough work environment and top tier pay.

APA is in transition from a completely adversarial "demand" relationship to a proactively engaged relationship. They've gotten more done on their contract in the last 8 months than they did in the previous 4 years.

So help me understand your point of view, please!

I can't disagree with you more here. There are at least 2 concrete examples here at Delta. 1. Having management's business plans and access to proprietary corporate financial data (whether from management, creditors committees, Board of Directors, etc.) was critical in preserving Delta pilot jobs and fighting off the US Airways hostile takeover. We were able to use financial data to prove the Delta standalone plan was better for everyone than the risky path Parker wanted to go down. That preserved over 1500 Delta pilot jobs that Parker wanted to cut. 2. We were able to improve pilot pay by being included during the NWA/DAL merger while all our other legacy competitors have been frozen out. Real money got put into pilot pockets. Assuming 85 hours of pay the average A330 capatain saw a $141,102 increase in take home pay from October 31, 2008 through December 31, 2012. That doesn't include the average 4000 shares of stock we received, or enhancements to the profit sharing plan that paid twice what the NWA plan paid their contract employees. Alaska, Hawaiian, AirTran and Spirit were all able to pattern up off our success. So far UAL/CAL, AMR, and LCC have been unable to deliver contract improvements. I hope they are successful - and soon - so they improve the pattern for us.

I believe the results show engagement to be an effective strategy. There is a place for confrontation and conflict(like NWA '98, Spirit), but it is a tool, not a strategy. When used as a standalone strategy, it doesn't appear to me to be very successful.

jmo, ymmv

 

I know. But it has been necessary to discuss even if it turns a thread dedicated to cheerleaders, underboob and sometimes Delta into this:



All I can say Dragon. Is just keep trying to get through. Don't stop.

Don't give up! Never surrender!

 

Not our problem. It's MANAGEMENT's job to make the airline money. It's our job to fly airplanes, & it's their job to manage the airline. They can pay us more, they just don't want to because then they have to find other suckers to push around.

Wake up people!

 

Very true and ALPA's successes here are vigorously applauded.

But, SWA and FedEx both have much tighter scope than we do and ALPA has not been heavily involved in renegotiating their job protection provisions (FedEx's carried over and have not been modified substantially).

Here at Delta, ALPA has partnered with management to outsource our labor and that is why we don't trust ALPA when negotiations start.

Any ideas on a fix? Why not a "jobs aren't for sale" pledge?

 

The funny/sad thing is, you can pay a lawyer to defend and argue any case. Makes you wonder what case they are being paid to defend.

 

Is it your position that AA management would have been happy to come to the table with a reasonable offer four years ago had APA been more "proactively engaged"? Your statment seems to imply that the negotiating methods of the APA are wholly are largely to blame for the lack of progress at AA.

I don't think it's valid to point to the slow pace in the AA negotiations as a failure of their union. The delay tactic given to management by the RLA was going to be used as long as it worked to the advantage of AA management, adversarial relationship or no. I think it is entirely more likely that AA management's willingness to negotiate has been brought about by the soon to be changing business envorinment and overall state of the industry (pilot retirements, the United Continental merger, the increasing profitability of Delta) rather than any change in APA methods.

In my book, the ability of APA and the American pilots to fight through this delay is to be applauded. It was (IMHO) probably necessary to achieve the best possible outcome.

 

The force moves in mysterious ways young Luke Skywalker ...

Would you be surprised if this afternoon the Company announced another fee for departure agreement to happen at some point in the future ranging up to say, 130 seats ... while simultaneously the Delta MEC announces a grievance settlement resolving the Republic Single Carrier issue ... something about Section 1B40 wasn't really enforceable and we'd have lost if we tried ... but hey, we all got a 5% mid contract raise and nobody will get furloughed ... .

The irony is, they would blame folks like you, because you made such a stink about Republic that they had to do something. That's why Brakechatter still hates me, because I understood the problem, he blames me for the result.

Sadly after seeing Eagle give up their entire Section 1 for a flow through to nowhere, nothing would surprise me.

Short and focused, the force is, young Jedi Knight, uuurrrgggghh

 

I would say yes, particularly when you factor in the slot swap approval.

 

If a TA like this were presented to the pilot group, it would overwhelmingly get voted down...and as you said accelerate the change to new representation.

 

Not trying to pick a fight, but I would be surprised if the avg 330 pilot flew more than 75 hrs. per month.