Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

80ktsClamp 10-04-2011 05:25 PM

Even the girls are into brown!

http://www.hayabusa.org/forum/attach...ls_uniform.jpg

Carl Spackler 10-04-2011 05:36 PM


Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 1064452)
This is populist drivel. On a very superficial level I can understand the appeal of the negative view of NDA's, especially if you completely distrust everything ALPA does as well as the people who volunteer, but as with most things the reality is far more in-depth, complex, and shades of gray.

It has nothing to do with trusting or distrusting ALPA. It has to do with distrusting management. The fact that you and union insiders like slowplay don't understand how you get used as mouthpieces for management is troubling.


Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 1064452)
I suggest you call your Reps, past or present, and they can give you numerous historical examples of where the NDA has given this pilot group advantages they would not have had otherwise. Being privy to corporate intel and plans ahead of the market and your competitors does not make you "in bed" with them. There are numerous times our interests align, just as there are numerous times they do not. Being opportunistic when they do to our collective advantage is bad how?

I don't need to call past or present reps to understand how wrong your statements are. When our interests align with management, all the information should be given out to the pilots so that we can all decide if our interests really align. Thus no NDA is needed. If our interests don't align, probabilities are high that management will lie to our leaders in order to gain advantage. Since that info is a lie, we again don't need an NDA because we have no need to see lies...secretly or publicly.


Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 1064452)
If you want to believe in grassy knolls behind every ALPA action there is no hope in a logical discussion.

We probably can't have a logical discussion with you because you use terms like "grassy knolls." I see that kind of BS with a lot of DALPA communications lately - including adding Dilbert cartoons referencing rumors and name calling DPA supporters. This is generally what is done by people who have a **** poor record and no ability to persuade people any other way. It can be a useful tactic, because nobody likes to be thought of as crazy or a flat earther. But I think most people see through it and see how weak the position of the "grassy knoll" guy really is.

Carl

Carl Spackler 10-04-2011 05:40 PM


Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1064477)
I'll ask again. Have we seen any successful snapbacks? It's a honest question.

Sorry for missing it earlier johnso29. Yes there have been. At NWA we negotiated a snapback after our givebacks in the 90's. When the time came for our wages to snap back, the company denied that the snapback really meant that wages should snap back, so we took them to court and won. 3 or 4% snapbacks if my memory serves.

Carl

Carl Spackler 10-04-2011 05:41 PM


Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1064506)
Spot on. Winner. And please everyone, it is not a pay increase until we are back at the level = to C2K pay. I even have a neat pin ALPA sent me around '04 with "C2k restoration " written on it in gold on a green background. How quicly they forget and aim for less than mediocrity.

Don't see anyone on the LEC/MEC wearing it now.

Indeed!

Carl

Carl Spackler 10-04-2011 05:43 PM


Originally Posted by tsquared030 (Post 1064518)
Well my DPA apologist friend...right back at you. :rolleyes:

T

Stop being a dullard and create an avatar that doesn't rip-off one of our other respected members.

Carl

Carl Spackler 10-04-2011 05:50 PM


Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1064731)
My point isnt that the info is all false, but rather that what management chooses to disclose can be statistically beneficial to management. If they disclosed 100% of everything then I would agree NDA's to some extent would be a necessary evil.

I'm glad you're optimistic on that angle though. I like your judgement over all and I admit maybe I'm too suspicious at times but it's better to be over cautions than over trusting. That goes for management as well as our own with secrets to keep from us for whatever reason.

All good points, but the biggest problem with it is the wedge it drives between union leaders and union members. Anytime a union leader knows something that they can't disclose to the members, it divides us. And if what they "know" is a purposeful lie by management, it's all the more damaging to us.

Carl

dragon 10-04-2011 06:02 PM


Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1064722)
It's not about hiding anything. The company will squeal total costs if they have to. Don't think they won't. When they say percentage we translate that into plus or minus SWA and then back out all expected compounded inflation. Suddenly that 70% is a small fraction of that.

Gloopy,

I'm not naive enough to think that management wouldn't squeal to the other groups if it's in their best interests. Rather, I was suggesting a face saving maneuver where they can have some plausible deniabilty with the other groups.

The big point that I think we're both making is there are more ways to improve our W-2 without a percentage increase in section three. We can make big gains in work rules, training and vacation pay. Heck even in benefits we can gain. Of course if we look at the bankruptcy contracts versus C2K we lost more than just pay rates, touching trips and other goodies went bye bye.

iaflyer 10-04-2011 06:04 PM


Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1064828)

Those cargo guys get everything - Money! Chicks! Widebodies (planes, not chicks),

Superpilot92 10-04-2011 06:13 PM


Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1064828)

^^^^^^ Worth repeating

scambo1 10-04-2011 06:17 PM


Originally Posted by dragon (Post 1064852)
Gloopy,

I'm not naive enough to think that management wouldn't squeal to the other groups if it's in their best interests. Rather, I was suggesting a face saving maneuver where they can have some plausible deniabilty with the other groups.

The big point that I think we're both making is there are more ways to improve our W-2 without a percentage increase in section three. We can make big gains in work rules, training and vacation pay. Heck even in benefits we can gain. Of course if we look at the bankruptcy contracts versus C2K we lost more than just pay rates, touching trips and other goodies went bye bye.


I think you are absolutely right. You can make more compensation, but it doesnt all have to show up as W2-able.

I would also like to share an opposing viewpoint for the folks that think it is cool to work 15+ days per month. Half of your life away from your family. When you are junior in category, that is your free days when your family isnt free. There are categories that have a lot of 15 day months or more...for lineholders...a sure sign we need a higher minimum day. I've got no problem working hard for a living, but I dont live to work and I certainly dont appreciate pointless wasted time away from home.

I am a big fan of 401k to the 415C limit funded by the company. Profit sharing should be mad money, not an after tax pad to retirement.

Management will "squeal" to the other groups, no matter what, when we are in section 6 negotiations.

I agree with all of your work rule enhancements.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:37 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands