Do I understand you correctly that you want everyone at 12+ years of service to have 432 (72 x 6) hours of vacation pay every year?? Sorry but I think that is the definition of strangling the golden goose, or was it choking the chicke . . . ahh, nevermind

You're onto something with #3, except I'd lower the number to 6:15/calendar day. FedEx has this, or something similar, and I'd like to think the company could build trips a little more efficiently (ie no 32 hour HSV layovers.) As long as they build the trips better they won't pay out much more credit and we keep moving with a result of more pay OR more days off - probably a little of both. Just imagine how popular UIO would suddenly become, or any of the other 2 leg, 3 day 10:30 trips we have now.

#4 is a pipe dream. I like your "go for the kill" mentality, but we need to prioritize and be reasonable. I think fixing Section 1 and 3 as FTB has suggested would more than get the 50%+1 that's needed to pass. I'd bet even just fixing one of the 2 sections as described would be enough, but it's hard to tell how guys would vote.

 

Yeah, I pause in silent thanks to ALPA and LM everytime I swiftly glide through the known crewmember lane. Wait a minute! I don't do that because CrewPass is still but a twinkle in LM's eye.

Until I no longer have to undress once a day on the way to the business end of the airplane, I don't want to hear one more word from ALPA about what a great success CrewPass is.

I'll say it again that I'm reminded of W standing on the aircraft carrier with the "Mission Accomplished" banner hanging behind him. Let's have some results and then do the self-congratulations, not the other way around.

TEN, not busting your balls. I knew you were being sarcastic because of the bugeye face

 

Put her in a "Class of 1974" high school yearbook and she looks like a Comair flight attendant.

 

Carl, a SLI is not overturned, you just negotiate a new seniority list. It is just the same as any negotiations, you don't try to overturn a bankruptcy ruling in 1113, you merely negotiate something different. USAPA isn't saying, let's do another arbitration or let's work out some process to reach a new list. They are saying, I have a seniority list and I want to change it. Your own DPA lawyer cites the United case repeatedly as his justification for negotiating a new list. If Rakestraw wasn't applicable, why does he cite it? In that case United had a list, it was being used for bidding, advanced entitlements, trip awards, everything. Then they negotiate a new list and say, Number 5000, you are now 5590, or whatever the result was (this was an example I don't have the real results.) Everything about Section 20 is negotiable, Einstein, the whole thing. If it was fixed, it wouldn't be in a contract.

Any bargaining agent can at any time go to their employer and say, I would like to bargain for a new seniority list. You don't have to overturn anything, you simply have to negotiate to assign new numbers to some or all of your employees, just like you would assign new pay rates. As I said before, it is not that simple, in fact it is difficult.

You are completely wrong, sorry. I could go back and cite other cases of seniority lists being changed, I have read through thousands of pages of transcripts, but I already have one, Rakestraw vs. ALPA that your DPA lawyer uses as the bedrock of his defense. All of the courts that this issue has been before do not recognize any significance to the fact that US Air has not combined operations. They only recognize that a union is free to bargain every section of their contract, but they do so under the threat of a DFR case. Every court, five federal judges in this case, have all affirmed that USAPA does not have free rein to "overturn" the Nicolau award. They have the right to bargain for a new seniority list. Every union has that right.

There is no distinction, three courts have upheld that there is no distinction, you are wrong.

 

Sigh, the texts were right.....

Dude, what is your deal?!? The statement was that I was disappointed in you, not that I hated you. You are way too smart to try an pull the victim ploy. It's beneath you, and appeals to emotions I don't have. You tried to bring up your RJDC crap again, and I called you on it--perhaps having a bit of inside perspective myself. You blow it all off until sailing comes in with more perspective, and you call him credible. That's fine, I don't need credit. A little history on me: It is rare that I jump into a fray unless I know that I am right. ASA and CMR MECs: great idea, poor execution. Delta's MEC: Wrong idea/ proper execution. Enough said.

The funny thing is that we both have the same goal: Delta flying by Delta pilots. I just don't necessarily agree that bringing potential hostages with subservient pay and work rules on board is the way to go about it. I mean, couple that in with our commuting Delta pilots' demands of: complimentary sky club membership, positive space passes to and from their residence in first class on their carrier of choice-with points, hotel accommodations when needed, not having to sit reserve when on reserve-----we really wouldn't have any negotiating capital left for the rest of the Delta pilots who have been living under BK wages for all of these years.

I will accept some part of the responsibility. Although a staunch no voter, primarily on scope, I did not actively gone door to door in an effort to bring other pilots' views in line with mine regarding our past concessionary TAs on scope. Could I have made a difference? Probably not. I even threw my hat into the ring to make more of an impact, and got a resounding "hell no" in deference to the guy who happened to fly a 777 during the JAL thunderous silence. So be it.

My suggestion is that you lay on your reps, hard, and that you spend time in lounges on productivity sits getting other pilots to call the reps as well. Failing that, your only answer is to recall them--for they hold the keys to the MEC chairman kingdom. There is a meeting coming up, so you'd better get going, and I suggest that you be well prepared, because the wagons WILL be circled. Exercise extreme caution, as a failed coup can be disastrous for your cause. Keyboard warrior ain't gonna cut it. If you are running into problems due to your past performance, well, that's your problem.

I was not aware that a grievance was filed in the RAH matter. Did I miss a meeting? I will promise you this, if your scenario above comes to fruition I will lead the lawsuit, yes a DFR lawsuit, and my card will be in the mail.

Once again, if you are going to label me, at least do it accurately.

 

Agreed, section 1 is my priority. Ftb covered that for me. #4 should be like FedEx or better (one can hope). #3 should be somewhere between my dream and what we got now. 11 hours 3 days are totally unsat.

 

BWAHAHAHAHA!!! And put her in a 1954 yearbook & she looks like a DAL FA.

 

Three short calls in five days with a relatively high raw. I must have ****ed somebody off. Cmon scheduling optimization!

 

I was there. The jist was we have too many "me too"'clauses with other employee groups, hence too expensive. Since when do we negotiate for other groups? I laughed at him and his group and walked away. If I were MSP based, I would question them more.

 

Only news on here guys, we all know this.

I said: "Only news on here guys, we all know this."

Pay attention !