Originally Posted by buzzpat (Post 1151488)

Really? You are really that disaffected Shiz? How do we get our company to say yes to contract improvements? How about the fact that pilots make the whole operation go? How about the fact that, while all of the other work groups are at or close to their pre-BK levels, we are about 45% short? How about the fact that, without our concurrence and adaptability, this almost seamless merger would not have occurred? That's how. We aren't asking for the same benefits packages that the senior management gets, we're asking to be compensated like our competition is compensated.

Let me ask you this. How can Delta management NOT compensate us for being the world's largest carrier, in sheer volume, at least at levels commensurate with the LCC that now operates in our HQ hub? How about them apples Shiz?

We are Delta and they are us. We have taken on enormous sacrifices to save our company and thrive in the environment of consolidation and growth. And we've done it in remarkable fashion. Take a look at US Air, United. American and SWA. We're not them, we are Delta. That's how.

Originally Posted by RockyBoy (Post 1151447)

It's there as far as the min day goes. Change duty period average to a daily average which would take care of the low paying 3 days.....at least the ones with more than 24 hours off in the middle. If we had that now we would get 5:15 per day so any 3 day would be worth 15:45 minimum.

Originally Posted by Columbia (Post 1151509)

So, does Carl eat the crow or does he serve it?

Originally Posted by FlyZ (Post 1151487)

No reining in the Alaska codeshare abuse? No requirements for the union to approve future codeshares (like SWA has)? No sunsetting of DCI contracts or reduction in 70+ seat flying? Not even a throwaway attempt to bring large RJ flying to our list? No changes to the compliance period for the AF KLM JV?

I don't want promises of furlough protection!...

Originally Posted by Jack Bauer (Post 1151493)

If DALPA was interested in reigning in scope they would have stated such plain and simple. They did not.

This "generic list of goals" had a big gaping hole where scope reclamation should have existed. That is an unacceptable void.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1151504)

Wrt to section 1.... Wait and see what is a controlled leak, or what the final agreement is before giving up. It could be week/months and if the company wants, years before we make any progress.

Stand strong on your wants. You control the outcome with your "yes" or "no" vote. Period.

I have my non-starters too, and no matter how good the rest of the document is, I will vote no as well, but I will wait until I see a TA to make that decision.

Originally Posted by RockyBoy (Post 1151454)

Scope is the only big ???? here in this "conceptual" opener. The concept appears to me that they will shoot for no more growth at DCI, but no DCI flying coming back to mainline and really just leaving the AS codeshare alone.

I thought it was interesting that ALPA will ask the company to oppose any foreign ownership changes. Kinda interesting to see a political issue come into play within our contract. I think foreign ownership could be our biggest threat in the next decade.....so I give them credit for heading in that direction early.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1151505)

Fyp;
There are no limits on 50 seaters. Better limits can be less 76 seaters, or no geared jet power airplanes above 50 seats. (a fantasy sunset clause) Wait and see the details of a final deal.

Originally Posted by RockyBoy (Post 1151454)

I thought it was interesting that ALPA will ask the company to oppose any foreign ownership changes. Kinda interesting to see a political issue come into play within our contract. I think foreign ownership could be our biggest threat in the next decade.....so I give them credit for heading in that direction early.