Originally Posted by gloopy

Call your reps and call your friends who agree and get them to call their reps. This is a BFD and needs to be preempted by as many line dogs like us as possible.

Originally Posted by FlighTimeBarbie

Sadly, the reps have little say at this point and, therefore, neither do we.

Originally Posted by FlighTimeBarbie

Although this sounds good in concept, as history has shown, the reality will be quite different. First, once the Negotiating Committee reaches a Tentative Agreement with the Company, it is too late! Once the MEC Administration (through the NegCom) has agreed with the Company...it will be delivered to the LEC Reps for a vote. Our Reps may galantly fight with the MEC leadership with the best of intentions, but ultimately, the Reps will be strong armed* into ratifying what has already been agreed to in the TA. Now there might be a few hold out's (who will be forever labelled "radicals'), but it will ultimately be ratified by the MEC.

Negotiating 101: Never send a TA back...the NegCom maintains that doing so destroys their credibility. (Remember the NegCom is all-knowing, so they will only agree to the TA when they believe they have squeezed the Company for everything possible, from a gentlemen's perspective.) Some may remember this 'first rule of negotiation' was seemingly violated in C2K. The threat of a strike was so great, the NegCom did go back to the Company for more, however, they added only a few (5?) low value items...it seemed more of a token attempt at renegotiation and strong arming the Company, to appease the angry pilots.

Once the POS TA is passed on to the pilots, the sell job begins: We - the pilots - MUST vote yes or else... (insert apocalyptic scenario). In C2k we were told we'd lose everything - something like: a grossly inferior contract would be imposed as punishment and we would lose all work rules and retro pay). We never did strike - and we won't this time.* (ALPA will never allow it under Moak, who clearly has higher personal career aspirations than ALPA National; read: cooperation).

So again, once something is TA'd by the NegCom, even a TA containing scope concessions...you will be voting on it. Unfortunately by then, the first rule of negotiating is shown to be true. Because...basically the union leadership has already shown their hand to the Company as to what they are willing to agree on. Even if the pilots turn it down and a strike threatens (though it hasn't/won't)...any improvements will be breadcrumbs at that point.

Those here who say scope is a definite no vote for them, I understand...it makes us feel good in the near time...but enjoy it while you can. Because when it comes to the MEC/ALPA National coordinated sell job, our voices will be drowned out. Scope loss has been an issue here for two decades and each contract erodes it more...unfortunately, so too will this contract because there will be just enough guys who buy what is being sold. The sell job will always cloud the judgment of just enough that a simple UP/DOWN vote is not so easy for a majority.

Remember, once it becomes a TA...UNFORTUNATELY, it is too late!

* Note to ACL: before you discount what I've written and say I don't give the LEC Reps enough credit... please respectfully reserve judgment until you directly experience a few section 6 negotiations on this property as a Delta pilot.

Originally Posted by 76drvr

I was responding to Free Bird, who wanted the reps to publicly disclose their position during negotiations. I believe there are possibly too many issues at play for that type of public statement and that most reps wouldn't make public statements during negotiations. Sorry for the confusion.

Originally Posted by 76drvr

It depends on the question. If you ask them do you want to give away Delta flying, of course the answer is no. If you ask them if they want to increase Delta pilot block hours, the answer is yes. If you ask them about JV protections, the answer varies. If you point out the lack of global JV protections, they almost all panic. I think there are lots of questions that need to be answered and they aren't just tied to one number.

Unlike you, I don't see DALPA as disconnected, I think they are very connected to the pilot group, probably more so than you or me. They are all Delta pilots and as a body they have significantly more input from more sources and more pilots than any one of us could have.

As for DPA, I don't think they got much further than getting out of the gate. Lot's of promises and attacks, but little substance. They promised two comm reps in each base (who are they), they promised C&BLs (where is it), they promised professional negotiators(who are they, who have they retained), they promised financial transparency (what's the status of their funds and exactly what have they spent their money on). I haven't seen any of those promises kept. As they say in Texas, "all hat, no cattle."

Originally Posted by Scoop

Guys,

This issue is a lot more complicated than a simple "No" vote. I am pretty much a Scope hawk and have submitted a DPA card, but:

Our present Scope sucks and needs to be improved. I believe that there is presently no limit on turbro-props at any seat level as just one glaring weakness and there are others.[B]
Scoop

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

I will not discredit per se, but I will reply that what you state is standard tactic. Lets wait and see what these reps do, IF a crappy TA shows up.

The admin may want a unanimous vote, but I am willing to be that more than a few reps will vote "no" if it fails to meet what this group as a whole wants.

How do I know? I asked the majority of them. The makeup of this group is a lot different than it was a few years ago. If anyone tries to shove a ****poor TA down on them, they will react. Before we get there, I would also state that the makeup of the NC is mid to junior level FO's. DO NOT discredit them either.

* I will give you that this is my first fill section 6 here at DAL, but is my third one in my career. The first one I was apart of the group turned down. I foresee the same thing here if it fails to meet expectations.