No AE out today? Well that's cold water on that notion.

http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/...if?w=165&h=220

ALPA will probably let it slide. Yeah, better to not make too many waves..... Yeah.....

DALPA gives them relief constantly. DALPA negotiates stuff to help management without gaining much for the pilots.(we had leverage for the joint contract and didn't use it) LM went to EB's kid's b-day party and probably gave him a nice gift. Management likes what it has right now. Pay up, or that may change.

To clarify on the joint contract statement, we knew Wall St was watching, and the company wanted to impress. We took a lower amount total because we were promised we could get a lot more on the next one thanks to the "$2 billion in combined synergies" gained from the merger. Where has all that money gone? To pay us more? Nope. To pay off debt, which is good, but we are a debt too. The taken pensions helped save the company, and it's time to get paid for that.

Agreed, it is an averaging of three 12 month periods over a three year rolling window. This is a little convoluted to find, but that is in fact how it reads. With the metrics that are now stated; 47.6% we have 0.9 basis points to return to the bottom end of the 1.5% point variance of 50-50%. If they hit the compliance average prior to Match 2014 then a new period starts with no look back. As we both agree, three years of averaging is a life time in this industry, and many of these agreements are subject to amendments in that sort of time frame.

The real point is that we went from a 12 month window with a 90 day corrective period to a three year, three 12 month periods averaging, and all of this was done via MOU. The first part of this MOU 14, the change in the production balance is totally within the bounds of a MOU as described in LOA 16; The AF-KLM_DAL JV, but the compliance window change is significant and was part of the same MOU. Until I saw this a few weeks ago in the September 2011 edit of the Live Contract, I had no idea that the measuring window and corrective period had been altered. The MOU 14 was added to the file library in Feb of 2011, or that is the date I recall on the document when I pulled it. That is eight months after its signing, and these changes were incorporated in to the live contract in September, some 14-15 months after they were agreed to via mou.

As you state, I would be very interested to hear the logic for this change. I called my rep, and he seems to recall this being briefed. I do not recall the second half change in the MOU, only the change to the production balance.

In the end the reality is that this is what we have, and will not change. Fact is that this is an agreement amongst eight parties. What needs to change is these sort of changes being LOAed where the reps vote on them.

The true question is will we be at a level of EASK's to be within the current limits, or will this agreement be modified by another entrant prior to March of 2014?

Sigh...it appears some guys haven't learned much through bankruptcy and a JCBA.

That "special symbiotic" relationship got you 22% increase in compensation plus 5.88% of the company since 2008. Real dollars, in your pocket and plans right now.

Those "tough guys" (who are they anyway?) have produced what?

crickets...

How many rats has SWAPA blown up? How many parties have they attended (and thrown)? Where's their pay? How many picket signs has FedEx carried? IPA is finally getting their furloughees recalled (only 6 of them to start) while working for a profitable UPS.

Where's American's contract? They've been in Section 6 for 5 years.

What has "hard nosed" cost any major management? UAL and CAL have both been in Section 6 for years. They've both been through a merger. What do their pilots have to show for it? Contracts that are still frozen in time and would need $300 million just to come up to Delta every year. Soon that will be $1 billion dollars they left behind. Instead, management there has found a way to work around the tough rhetoric and pander show being put on for the membership while pocketing that $300 million annual difference.

If APA had signed a deal for 5% raises per year when they first put their 52% demand on the table, the average 757 Captain there would have $45,000 more in his paycheck this year. That's real money to me.

So bloviate about the guy with the website, no results and checkered legal advice. I'll take results over "tough" rhetoric any day.

The have only worked for the union twice and it was very modest work. I served as a monitor during the Comair strike to insure we did not fly struck work. Hung out at the airport on my days off watching flights. I served as a strike coordinator in my area during the 01 contract which since not many pilots live near me amounted to almost nothing. Other then that I have not served in any capacity with DALPA and have not worked at all for the union in the last 10 years.
I am simply far to lazy for DALPA work. The pilots who do the work make enormous sacrifices and work way to hard for me to consider it.

You must be a rep, because this the same stuff they are saying in the Q&A sessions. Watch out for the NMB, don't compare us to SWA or FedEx, yada yada yada. It's called managing expectations, and apparently it is scripted via a high ranking ALPA member. That guy with the website has almost 4000 Delta pilots behind him, but go ahead and minimize that, Wilson Polling sure doesn't. That is why ALPA needs to go. The good thing is the DPA is gaining momentum, and a bad first TA via ALPA could push the DPA cards in via waves. It's all about results this time, and Delta's finances are better, (including $952 million in bag fees last year) so that excuse won't work. ALPA could lose the $38 million in dues from Delta each year, and YOU know it. Put out a great TA, or expect the vote. I can't wait. Either ALPA gives us a TA worthy to vote on with no excuses, or we can vote for something different, and with the second round of consolidation coming up (not my words, a high level guy's, even more leverage btw) there is no excuse.

OK, I am starting to get this figured out. A full reading of the PWA Section is required to understand it.

The violation example is found in Section 1 P. 6., but the operative language it relies on is in 1. P. 4. which is a 12 month look. Then the balance would have to be restored in 12 months (and not at the end, the number of EASK over would have to equate over 12 months, so the fix would have to be immediate and counterbalance).

The way I see it, the balance has to be maintained yearly ... this makes sense as seasonal changes result in different flying patterns. BUT, to make the numbers balance at the end of 12 months the flying has to be allocated and coordinated constantly.

The three year window is a safeguard. Kind of like the 100 hours 30 days and 1,000 hours a year limit on flight time.

I was completely freaked out by the idea that we'd have a snapshot every 36 months. Now that I see how the thing works, it's really pretty cool.

ACL65,

I screwed up when I said "average" it is one big sum added up for the preceding 12 months and 36 months with balance triggers. Yes the Company can be out of compliance, but they start running a deficit of EASK's that have to be caught back up.

The reason it was changed was to add Alitalia and we're the winner. They got added to Air France / KLM's side and it forces growth over to us to balance. The balance could not happen instantly with our mod lines going on the widebodies, which is why we will probably be out of balance in early mid 2012 and back in 2013. But to make the numbers add up, it will force growth to us.

I want to be Delta Air Lines, not Delta Travel agent to the world. Travel agents don't have to buy replacement aircraft, or negotiate pilot contracts. Also, we're from Dalpa, we don't do grievances.

Jim

Sorry, too much A320 home study makes one grumpy. (payed at 1 for 3.)