Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-22-2011, 07:42 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Space Shuttle PIC
Posts: 2,007
Originally Posted by groundstop
We won't see 15% for the opener. More like 5%-10% with 4-5% per year.
This was close to what I was hearing up NORTH. "Wall Street may not like it if we get a higher percentage initially", and I also heard the question "what would the other employee groups think?" The DPA sounds great after hearing garbage like that. It's all about managing expectations, and this opener better be HUGE.
09-22-2011, 07:45 PM
seeing the large hubs...
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,707
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
This was close to what I was hearing up NORTH. Wall Street may not like it if we get a higher percentage, and I also heard the question "what would the other employee groups think?" The DPA isn't really a bad idea after you hear those types of things.
09-22-2011, 08:00 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
For all of you considering a side business... how about a decent fast food restaurant at the ATL airport? Burritos? How hard is it to have burrito's in terminal A and B or something like that?
Don't tell my wife, but in regards to Pam, I did that.
09-22-2011, 08:00 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by iaflyer
That's why we need to get the raises via work rules. Wall Street types and newspapers look for the quick quote, "15% over 3 years". But get the money in the work rules or retirement - they won't know what 4:30 vacation pay means or 5:15 min day. Or additional 5% in 401(k) contribution.
But if management wants to play cool and just talk hourly rates then I want them to explain how we we're willing to take a 10% cut right off the top in our hourly wages. But get paid by the duty hour with min pay probably around the 10 hour mark.
----
On a different subject. There seems to be a lot of fingers pointed around on who would give up what during the contract negotiations. In particular, old guys don't want to rock the boat this close to retirement and young civilian guys have never made this much money and they'll never rock the boat.
I think when it comes to the young civilian guys you'd be surprised how many of them, despite making more than their previous job, have no problem walking off the job.
We don't talk about striking over C2012 much but don't be surprised if the RJ types have no problem demanding SWA scope and pay + or FEDEX scope and pay + or we vote every TA down and we strike. They're not as wimpy as some seem to think. After all, while very unpopular, it was Comair that went on strike.
You have to wait and see, just like we have to wait and see what the company offers and what ALPA offers. Frankly, none of us know right now what this pilot group will do or even what the economy we are negotiating in will be.
09-22-2011, 08:01 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
deleted...........
Last edited by forgot to bid; 09-23-2011 at 04:19 AM.
09-22-2011, 08:10 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
80's "political" post for the night:
09-22-2011, 08:11 PM
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
I don't know why everyone is putting so much emphasis on the opener.
I still think its even money that the union and management will agree to not even publish detailed "openers". As long as we're still operating under this "constructive engagement" thing there's not much to be gained by staking out extreme positions for public consumption at the start of negotiations. All that does is generate animosity.
Speculation:
Contrary to the popular consensus on the various web forums, I think its possible that the absence of militant rhetoric coming from our union is not necessarily a sign of weakness or any effort to manage expectations but may instead be a deliberate effort to see if all this Moak-inspired new age labor relations will work. They may be preparing to test management's sincerity in living up to the spirit of the Recovery Compact they signed.
The keyboard warriors, myself included, have been going on the assumption that there has to be a full scale battle. That a decent contract is not going to be possible until we're all out there marching in front of the airport, inflating the rat and burning scrap lumber in 55 gallon drums.
DALPA might be trying to break that paradigm. They've been at it for 5 years now. What makes us think they don't intend to continue it now that it really counts and test it right through the first few bargaining sessions? What if a low key approach leads to a good contract on or before the amendable date without all the drama? Is that unacceptable? Wouldn't that actually be preferable? Time value of money and all that.
The AA pilots tried the big opener with the radical rhetoric and the inflammatory attacks on their management. The result was less than spectacular. The NMB stiff-armed them and they have been forced to basically start over. Meanwhile, years go by. A politically savvy, well prepared, calm business-like approach might be worth a try.
Its ultimately gonna be up to Anderson. We can always shift tactics and pull out the torches and pitchforks if management refuses to pay us what we deserve and this thing drags into 2013.
I'm growing weary of the unsubstantiated claims that somebody's friend's brother overheard an unnamed ALPA rep at the 31 Flavors saying we can't get big gains in this contract. I'm not buying it.
We elected these guys, they know damn well we expect to be paid, and I think we're going to have to let them try it their way. And if you don't trust them and you think they're planning to sell us out then I've only got 2 words: Membership Ratification.
Sorry for the long rant. The football game got boring.
I'm an optimist I guess. (but I do have my pitchfork in the garage)
I still think its even money that the union and management will agree to not even publish detailed "openers". As long as we're still operating under this "constructive engagement" thing there's not much to be gained by staking out extreme positions for public consumption at the start of negotiations. All that does is generate animosity.
Speculation:
Contrary to the popular consensus on the various web forums, I think its possible that the absence of militant rhetoric coming from our union is not necessarily a sign of weakness or any effort to manage expectations but may instead be a deliberate effort to see if all this Moak-inspired new age labor relations will work. They may be preparing to test management's sincerity in living up to the spirit of the Recovery Compact they signed.
The keyboard warriors, myself included, have been going on the assumption that there has to be a full scale battle. That a decent contract is not going to be possible until we're all out there marching in front of the airport, inflating the rat and burning scrap lumber in 55 gallon drums.
DALPA might be trying to break that paradigm. They've been at it for 5 years now. What makes us think they don't intend to continue it now that it really counts and test it right through the first few bargaining sessions? What if a low key approach leads to a good contract on or before the amendable date without all the drama? Is that unacceptable? Wouldn't that actually be preferable? Time value of money and all that.
The AA pilots tried the big opener with the radical rhetoric and the inflammatory attacks on their management. The result was less than spectacular. The NMB stiff-armed them and they have been forced to basically start over. Meanwhile, years go by. A politically savvy, well prepared, calm business-like approach might be worth a try.
Its ultimately gonna be up to Anderson. We can always shift tactics and pull out the torches and pitchforks if management refuses to pay us what we deserve and this thing drags into 2013.
I'm growing weary of the unsubstantiated claims that somebody's friend's brother overheard an unnamed ALPA rep at the 31 Flavors saying we can't get big gains in this contract. I'm not buying it.
We elected these guys, they know damn well we expect to be paid, and I think we're going to have to let them try it their way. And if you don't trust them and you think they're planning to sell us out then I've only got 2 words: Membership Ratification.
Sorry for the long rant. The football game got boring.
I'm an optimist I guess. (but I do have my pitchfork in the garage)
09-22-2011, 09:20 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Space Shuttle PIC
Posts: 2,007
Originally Posted by Check Essential
I don't know why everyone is putting so much emphasis on the opener.
I still think its even money that the union and management will agree to not even publish detailed "openers". As long as we're still operating under this "constructive engagement" thing there's not much to be gained by staking out extreme positions for public consumption at the start of negotiations. All that does is generate animosity.
Speculation:
Contrary to the popular consensus on the various web forums, I think its possible that the absence of militant rhetoric coming from our union is not necessarily a sign of weakness or any effort to manage expectations but may instead be a deliberate effort to see if all this Moak-inspired new age labor relations will work. They may be preparing to test management's sincerity in living up to the spirit of the Recovery Compact they signed.
The keyboard warriors, myself included, have been going on the assumption that there has to be a full scale battle. That a decent contract is not going to be possible until we're all out there marching in front of the airport, inflating the rat and burning scrap lumber in 55 gallon drums.
DALPA might be trying to break that paradigm. They've been at it for 5 years now. What makes us think they don't intend to continue it now that it really counts and test it right through the first few bargaining sessions? What if a low key approach leads to a good contract on or before the
amendable date without all the drama? Is that unacceptable? Wouldn't that actually be preferable? Time value of money and all that.
The AA pilots tried the big opener with the radical rhetoric and the inflammatory attacks on their management. The result was less than
spectacular. The NMB stiff-armed them and they have been forced to basically start over. Meanwhile, years go by. A politically savvy, well prepared, calm business-like approach might be worth a try.
Its ultimately gonna be up to Anderson. We can always shift tactics and pull out the torches and pitchforks if management refuses to pay us what we deserve and this thing drags into 2013.
I'm growing weary of the unsubstantiated claims that somebody's friend's brother overheard an unnamed ALPA rep at the 31 Flavors saying we can't get big gains in this contract. I'm not buying it
We elected these guys, they know damn well we expect to be paid, and I think we're going to have to let them try it their way. And if you don't trust them and you think they're planning to sell us out then I've only got 2 words: Membership Ratification.
Sorry for the long rant. The football game got boring.
I'm an optimist I guess. (but I do have my pitchfork in the garage)
I still think its even money that the union and management will agree to not even publish detailed "openers". As long as we're still operating under this "constructive engagement" thing there's not much to be gained by staking out extreme positions for public consumption at the start of negotiations. All that does is generate animosity.
Speculation:
Contrary to the popular consensus on the various web forums, I think its possible that the absence of militant rhetoric coming from our union is not necessarily a sign of weakness or any effort to manage expectations but may instead be a deliberate effort to see if all this Moak-inspired new age labor relations will work. They may be preparing to test management's sincerity in living up to the spirit of the Recovery Compact they signed.
The keyboard warriors, myself included, have been going on the assumption that there has to be a full scale battle. That a decent contract is not going to be possible until we're all out there marching in front of the airport, inflating the rat and burning scrap lumber in 55 gallon drums.
DALPA might be trying to break that paradigm. They've been at it for 5 years now. What makes us think they don't intend to continue it now that it really counts and test it right through the first few bargaining sessions? What if a low key approach leads to a good contract on or before the
amendable date without all the drama? Is that unacceptable? Wouldn't that actually be preferable? Time value of money and all that.
The AA pilots tried the big opener with the radical rhetoric and the inflammatory attacks on their management. The result was less than
spectacular. The NMB stiff-armed them and they have been forced to basically start over. Meanwhile, years go by. A politically savvy, well prepared, calm business-like approach might be worth a try.
Its ultimately gonna be up to Anderson. We can always shift tactics and pull out the torches and pitchforks if management refuses to pay us what we deserve and this thing drags into 2013.
I'm growing weary of the unsubstantiated claims that somebody's friend's brother overheard an unnamed ALPA rep at the 31 Flavors saying we can't get big gains in this contract. I'm not buying it
We elected these guys, they know damn well we expect to be paid, and I think we're going to have to let them try it their way. And if you don't trust them and you think they're planning to sell us out then I've only got 2 words: Membership Ratification.
Sorry for the long rant. The football game got boring.
I'm an optimist I guess. (but I do have my pitchfork in the garage)
You're not buying it, huh? This is an anonymous board, and ALPA people read this. How about keeping it anonymous? A lot of what you stated was EXACTLY what those people up NORTH stated as excuses, primarily the AA opener and NMB putting them in a corner for a year. Our reps need to listen to our wants, and then give them to the negotiators, period. AA's MEC Chair said 50% raise immediately, which may have been too much, but when I hear stuff like 10% here, and then maybe 5% there, then I say move over for the DPA who will not aim low because they are afraid of the NMB.
09-22-2011, 10:16 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 7ERB
Posts: 2,039
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
Alright, let's get an account of where everyone has been over the past few months. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone... other than 80.
TEN
09-23-2011, 02:22 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,462
Originally Posted by Check Essential
I don't know why everyone is putting so much emphasis on the opener.
I still think its even money that the union and management will agree to not even publish detailed "openers". As long as we're still operating under this "constructive engagement" thing there's not much to be gained by staking out extreme positions for public consumption at the start of negotiations. All that does is generate animosity.
Speculation:
Contrary to the popular consensus on the various web forums, I think its possible that the absence of militant rhetoric coming from our union is not necessarily a sign of weakness or any effort to manage expectations but may instead be a deliberate effort to see if all this Moak-inspired new age labor relations will work. They may be preparing to test management's sincerity in living up to the spirit of the Recovery Compact they signed.
The keyboard warriors, myself included, have been going on the assumption that there has to be a full scale battle. That a decent contract is not going to be possible until we're all out there marching in front of the airport, inflating the rat and burning scrap lumber in 55 gallon drums.
DALPA might be trying to break that paradigm. They've been at it for 5 years now. What makes us think they don't intend to continue it now that it really counts and test it right through the first few bargaining sessions? What if a low key approach leads to a good contract on or before the amendable date without all the drama? Is that unacceptable? Wouldn't that actually be preferable? Time value of money and all that.
The AA pilots tried the big opener with the radical rhetoric and the inflammatory attacks on their management. The result was less than spectacular. The NMB stiff-armed them and they have been forced to basically start over. Meanwhile, years go by. A politically savvy, well prepared, calm business-like approach might be worth a try.
Its ultimately gonna be up to Anderson. We can always shift tactics and pull out the torches and pitchforks if management refuses to pay us what we deserve and this thing drags into 2013.
I'm growing weary of the unsubstantiated claims that somebody's friend's brother overheard an unnamed ALPA rep at the 31 Flavors saying we can't get big gains in this contract. I'm not buying it.
We elected these guys, they know damn well we expect to be paid, and I think we're going to have to let them try it their way. And if you don't trust them and you think they're planning to sell us out then I've only got 2 words: Membership Ratification.
Sorry for the long rant. The football game got boring.
I'm an optimist I guess. (but I do have my pitchfork in the garage)
I still think its even money that the union and management will agree to not even publish detailed "openers". As long as we're still operating under this "constructive engagement" thing there's not much to be gained by staking out extreme positions for public consumption at the start of negotiations. All that does is generate animosity.
Speculation:
Contrary to the popular consensus on the various web forums, I think its possible that the absence of militant rhetoric coming from our union is not necessarily a sign of weakness or any effort to manage expectations but may instead be a deliberate effort to see if all this Moak-inspired new age labor relations will work. They may be preparing to test management's sincerity in living up to the spirit of the Recovery Compact they signed.
The keyboard warriors, myself included, have been going on the assumption that there has to be a full scale battle. That a decent contract is not going to be possible until we're all out there marching in front of the airport, inflating the rat and burning scrap lumber in 55 gallon drums.
DALPA might be trying to break that paradigm. They've been at it for 5 years now. What makes us think they don't intend to continue it now that it really counts and test it right through the first few bargaining sessions? What if a low key approach leads to a good contract on or before the amendable date without all the drama? Is that unacceptable? Wouldn't that actually be preferable? Time value of money and all that.
The AA pilots tried the big opener with the radical rhetoric and the inflammatory attacks on their management. The result was less than spectacular. The NMB stiff-armed them and they have been forced to basically start over. Meanwhile, years go by. A politically savvy, well prepared, calm business-like approach might be worth a try.
Its ultimately gonna be up to Anderson. We can always shift tactics and pull out the torches and pitchforks if management refuses to pay us what we deserve and this thing drags into 2013.
I'm growing weary of the unsubstantiated claims that somebody's friend's brother overheard an unnamed ALPA rep at the 31 Flavors saying we can't get big gains in this contract. I'm not buying it.
We elected these guys, they know damn well we expect to be paid, and I think we're going to have to let them try it their way. And if you don't trust them and you think they're planning to sell us out then I've only got 2 words: Membership Ratification.
Sorry for the long rant. The football game got boring.
I'm an optimist I guess. (but I do have my pitchfork in the garage)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
