Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
10-02-2011 | 08:04 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,874
Likes: 0
From: Retired (mandatory age 65)
I can also tell you that, if the pilots want 10-15% total that is what they are going to go for. Strat Planning gives their opinion, and the MEC will decide where to go.
I would be floored if the opener is less than what you suggest. I would expect close what the SEA FO Rep states in his article North By Southwest as a end game, not a opener. Oh and btw, if it is no where near that, the decision for me will be easy, No! Scope give backs? Nope, Work Rule give backs? Nope.
Even if AMR is in CH11 I am not giving anything back.
I would be floored if the opener is less than what you suggest. I would expect close what the SEA FO Rep states in his article North By Southwest as a end game, not a opener. Oh and btw, if it is no where near that, the decision for me will be easy, No! Scope give backs? Nope, Work Rule give backs? Nope.
Even if AMR is in CH11 I am not giving anything back.
But I'm not holding my breath... 
10-02-2011 | 08:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,248
Likes: 0
From: 767A (Ret)
I will be truly shocked
I would be floored
10-02-2011 | 08:28 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
First. Newk.
I don't even know why I am talking to you. Your #@%# bears beat my Cam. And it wasn't even the @%#%^ bears. It was that @#%@3 Hester guy again.
But, to answer your question and couple it all together with what ACL was talking about here,
this is what I am thinking - there is no better man to have at the helm of our union as we battle transgender airlines than Carl Spackler.
I don't even know why I am talking to you. Your #@%# bears beat my Cam. And it wasn't even the @%#%^ bears. It was that @#%@3 Hester guy again.
But, to answer your question and couple it all together with what ACL was talking about here,
this is what I am thinking - there is no better man to have at the helm of our union as we battle transgender airlines than Carl Spackler.
1.) Do not to apologize for any Bears win. The other teams are better than them anyway. They will make up for it.
2.) When you expect the Bears to win -- they lose. When you expect them to lose -- they win.
3.) It's always better to be lucky than good.
It looks like you have something special with Newton though.
I agree, if there is anyone who could kick some butt and enforce stronger scope FOR Delta pilots, it would be Carl. He shouldn't sell himself short.
Last edited by newKnow; 10-02-2011 at 08:41 PM.
10-02-2011 | 09:22 PM
Banned
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
From: Space Shuttle PIC
I can also tell you that, if the pilots want 10-15% total that is what they are going to go for. Strat Planning gives their opinion, and the MEC will decide where to go.
I would be floored if the opener is less than what you suggest. I would expect close what the SEA FO Rep states in his article North By Southwest as a end game, not a opener. Oh and btw, if it is no where near that, the decision for me will be easy, No! Scope give backs? Nope, Work Rule give backs? Nope.
Even if AMR is in CH11 I am not giving anything back.
I would be floored if the opener is less than what you suggest. I would expect close what the SEA FO Rep states in his article North By Southwest as a end game, not a opener. Oh and btw, if it is no where near that, the decision for me will be easy, No! Scope give backs? Nope, Work Rule give backs? Nope.
Even if AMR is in CH11 I am not giving anything back.
That's not really true. When I told a rep from my LEC to stop managing my expectations, he told me "I'm just giving you REALISTIC expectations.". They are already trying to prepare us for something. Yet another reason I am looking towards a new union vote. With bag fees totaling over $950 million last year, and we shouldn't EXPECT a big raise? No way. American going BK is one comparison, but UAL making almost twice as much as we did last quarter is another ($366 million before early out payouts vs UAL's $583 million with CAL).
10-02-2011 | 10:25 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
As a life-long Bears fan, I have learned several things:
1.) Do not to apologize for any Bears win. The other teams are better than them anyway. They will make up for it.
2.) When you expect the Bears to win -- they lose. When you expect them to lose -- they win.
3.) It's always better to be lucky than good.
It looks like you have something special with Newton though.
I agree, if there is anyone who could kick some butt and enforce stronger scope FOR Delta pilots, it would be Carl. He shouldn't sell himself short.
1.) Do not to apologize for any Bears win. The other teams are better than them anyway. They will make up for it.
2.) When you expect the Bears to win -- they lose. When you expect them to lose -- they win.
3.) It's always better to be lucky than good.
It looks like you have something special with Newton though.
I agree, if there is anyone who could kick some butt and enforce stronger scope FOR Delta pilots, it would be Carl. He shouldn't sell himself short.
10-03-2011 | 02:52 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
From: Still in one
Yes. But I can't speak about ATL because I just don't know if they are under the same threat.
It wouldn't help ALPA in my opinion. But DALPA's opinion seems to be similar to that of acl65pilot in that they see zero chance of DPA succeeding. With that in mind, killing DTW would simply serve constructive notice to the surviving LEC's as to who is in charge.
Carl
It wouldn't help ALPA in my opinion. But DALPA's opinion seems to be similar to that of acl65pilot in that they see zero chance of DPA succeeding. With that in mind, killing DTW would simply serve constructive notice to the surviving LEC's as to who is in charge.
Carl
Despite what some might like it is difficult to use as a form of ALPA McCarthyism or Sedition Act to silence political opposition. Also you cannot charge a council, only a member. Charges against an LEC or MEC officer have to be heard via the Hearing Board, which is made of members chosen from a pool by the Executive Council. No Kangaroo courts.
Having a political debate of difference is not "contrary to the best interests of the Association or it's members", however using Article 8 speciously can itself be considered such and subject the accuser to possible charges.
OTOH going to management trying to get a fellow pilot and ALPA member terminated over violating social media policy might meet that standard, however I don't think the much maligned DALPA acted on that did they?
Last edited by TANSTAAFL; 10-03-2011 at 03:07 AM.
10-03-2011 | 03:45 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
Is it just me, or, does all this talk of replacing our bargaining agent during Section 6 just seem a little dumb?
Most talk about replacing ALPA if the opener is unsatisfactory. How could you pick a worse time to start a representational battle? Regardless of your reasoning, management (and the NMB) will take a "wait and see" position. Nobody will give anything if they are not sure they are negotiating with the correct representative. It will be like my first attempts at doing business in Latin America. "Gringo, you sign contract with wrong person, he no have authority." In effect, we as a pilot group will have created the form of democracy being tried in Afghanistan.
Management absolutely will not "raise the floor" for the next representative to start with. We could demand 125% ... ... ... ... The result will be nothing will happen. We sure wont be released to strike by the NMB. So what's our next move?
The DPA needs to make a choice. Option 1 was to hold the vote last spring ... but they were unable to get the cards. Option 2 is to wait until AFTER Section 6 to avoid harming our Contract. By making our Bargaining Agent appear illegitimate they can prevent progress at the table.
The only significant leverage we have is getting released to strike. Every contract negotiation ends with a deal, or a strike. Getting the release to engage in self help is highly political. Just like management, the politicians aren't going to give ALPA or DPA any credibility if they are unsure who the bargaining agent will be.
Worst case, the DPA wins a vote, then realizes they have the exact same issues as ALPA had, but with no relationship with management or the NMB.
Vinegar and Bluster used to work in the union business, that changed in 1936.
Most talk about replacing ALPA if the opener is unsatisfactory. How could you pick a worse time to start a representational battle? Regardless of your reasoning, management (and the NMB) will take a "wait and see" position. Nobody will give anything if they are not sure they are negotiating with the correct representative. It will be like my first attempts at doing business in Latin America. "Gringo, you sign contract with wrong person, he no have authority." In effect, we as a pilot group will have created the form of democracy being tried in Afghanistan.
Management absolutely will not "raise the floor" for the next representative to start with. We could demand 125% ... ... ... ... The result will be nothing will happen. We sure wont be released to strike by the NMB. So what's our next move?
The DPA needs to make a choice. Option 1 was to hold the vote last spring ... but they were unable to get the cards. Option 2 is to wait until AFTER Section 6 to avoid harming our Contract. By making our Bargaining Agent appear illegitimate they can prevent progress at the table.
The only significant leverage we have is getting released to strike. Every contract negotiation ends with a deal, or a strike. Getting the release to engage in self help is highly political. Just like management, the politicians aren't going to give ALPA or DPA any credibility if they are unsure who the bargaining agent will be.
Worst case, the DPA wins a vote, then realizes they have the exact same issues as ALPA had, but with no relationship with management or the NMB.
Vinegar and Bluster used to work in the union business, that changed in 1936.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 10-03-2011 at 04:03 AM.
10-03-2011 | 03:48 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
Have you actually read the ALPA constitution and bylaws reference Article 8? Available on the ALPA website library section, page 60. Worth a read. We actually have a pretty good system in place. I'm sure you guys will use it as a template or just change the header and footer
Despite what some might like it is difficult to use as a form of ALPA McCarthyism or Sedition Act to silence political opposition. Also you cannot charge a council, only a member. Charges against an LEC or MEC officer have to be heard via the Hearing Board, which is made of members chosen from a pool by the Executive Council. No Kangaroo courts.
Having a political debate of difference is not "contrary to the best interests of the Association or it's members", however using Article 8 speciously can itself be considered such and subject the accuser to possible charges.
OTOH going to management trying to get a fellow pilot and ALPA member terminated over violating social media policy might meet that standard, however I don't think the much maligned DALPA acted on that did they?
Despite what some might like it is difficult to use as a form of ALPA McCarthyism or Sedition Act to silence political opposition. Also you cannot charge a council, only a member. Charges against an LEC or MEC officer have to be heard via the Hearing Board, which is made of members chosen from a pool by the Executive Council. No Kangaroo courts.
Having a political debate of difference is not "contrary to the best interests of the Association or it's members", however using Article 8 speciously can itself be considered such and subject the accuser to possible charges.
OTOH going to management trying to get a fellow pilot and ALPA member terminated over violating social media policy might meet that standard, however I don't think the much maligned DALPA acted on that did they?
10-03-2011 | 03:52 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
BB, I agree, but here's a thought, what about Option 3?
Option 3 is where all the DPA guys (who are dues paying DALPA members) show up at their LEC meetings and DEMAND the changes they seek, through the process already in place.
Why they want to reinvent the wheel is beyond me, if they put half the effort into working within the system already in place that they are putting into replacing the system, well, it would work out much better for them, and quicker.
Option 3 is where all the DPA guys (who are dues paying DALPA members) show up at their LEC meetings and DEMAND the changes they seek, through the process already in place.
Why they want to reinvent the wheel is beyond me, if they put half the effort into working within the system already in place that they are putting into replacing the system, well, it would work out much better for them, and quicker.
10-03-2011 | 03:54 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Is it just me, or, does all this talk of replacing our bargaining agent during Section 6 just seem a little dumb?
Most talk about replacing ALPA if the opener is unsatisfactory. How could you pick a worse time to start a representational battle? Regardless of your reasoning, management (and the NMB) will take a "wait and see" position. Nobody will give anything if they are not sure they are negotiating with the correct representative. It will be like my first attempts at doing business in Latin America. "Gringo, you sign contract with wrong person, he no have authority." Management absolutely will not "raise the floor" for the next representative?
We could demand 125% ... ... ... ...
The result will be nothing will happen. We sure wont be released to strike by the NMB. So what's our next move?
The DPA needs to make a choice. Option 1 was to hold the vote last spring ... but they were unable to get the cards. Option 2 is to wait until AFTER Section 6 to avoid harming our Contract by knifing our Bargaining Agent in the back.
Most talk about replacing ALPA if the opener is unsatisfactory. How could you pick a worse time to start a representational battle? Regardless of your reasoning, management (and the NMB) will take a "wait and see" position. Nobody will give anything if they are not sure they are negotiating with the correct representative. It will be like my first attempts at doing business in Latin America. "Gringo, you sign contract with wrong person, he no have authority." Management absolutely will not "raise the floor" for the next representative?
We could demand 125% ... ... ... ...
The result will be nothing will happen. We sure wont be released to strike by the NMB. So what's our next move?
The DPA needs to make a choice. Option 1 was to hold the vote last spring ... but they were unable to get the cards. Option 2 is to wait until AFTER Section 6 to avoid harming our Contract by knifing our Bargaining Agent in the back.
Option 3: Do what they are doing and allow our bargaining agent to commit hara kiri with an poor opener. When the DAL pilots realize they have absolutely nothing to lose by replacing their bargaining agent, the NMB and company will know who they are negotiating with. There will be a delay in the contract...yes, but for a good cause.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
