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)

Flamer 04-25-2012 05:54 AM


Originally Posted by Enemyofthestate (Post 1175383)
They, and most other MEC's do this, and while appearing to make a rational pro/con case are generally highly biased towards voting in favor of the TA. By the time it makes it that far the NC and MEC are too wedded to and proud of the product they produced to do anything other than strongly endorse it. Just a fact of life.



There is not an ALPA volunteer out there that is not doing anything other than what they believe is in the best interest of the pilot group. The issue has always been when that view of what's best does not align with what the unwashed pilot masses believe is in their best interest, and well meaning, "better informed" volunteers saving them from themselves.



I don't believe in the history of either DAL or NWA a TA that went out for a MEMRAT has ever been voted down. The MEC(s) carefully poll and know and plan a TA they put out for vote will pass.

As to neutral recommendations, that happened at the last NWA ch11 TA, and it was then mercilessly sold by the MEC. Still bad blood over that.

I've never fielded a phone call from them, but I do have the feeling ALPA is constantly trying to poll me.

Sink r8 04-25-2012 06:01 AM

Q1 Webcast starting.

Free Bird 04-25-2012 06:06 AM


Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 1175390)
Our new reserve rules are a huge degradation in quality of life. I flew a spillover into the month of 1 day, a 2 day, a 3 day, sat 3 shortcalls for a total of 9 days of work for a whopping 76 raw. I am still number 1 for a 4 day so when I get a 4 day, I will have worked 13 days to get into bucket 2. Unfortunately for me the moth will be over.

Let me get this straight. You actually have flown 6 days this month and it's a huge degradation in your quality of life? Worst case you're going to fly 10 days and get paid for 70 hours.

I think the new system is a huge improvement over the old one as the schedulers can no longer use the "dart board" method of distribution. I just got a short call while 5 folks junior to me had 1 or 2 fewer short calls and got to sit long call? That's the same logic that schedulers used prior to this system. The new system isn't perfect, it is significantly better than the old one.

What 1400 of us wouldn't have given to have gotten paid 70 hours for 10 days of flying while we were furloughed post 911. Just my perspective, hope it gets better for you.

scambo1 04-25-2012 06:06 AM


Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1175392)
Seems like a good thing, to T/A what the membership wants. Of course, that depends on how fair the polling is. My experienced has been mixed in this regard, not so much at Delta, but Age 65 comes to mind.



Why do you think that is (the sales job)? They're that proud of the product that they just slowly take ownership of it, like a proud parent that just cut the umbillical cord? I've never understood it. The product should speak for itself. I don't even see the point in an "official" pro-con paper.

I suppose the reps can't simply disappear when a T/A is reached. People have questions/comments. So I suppose that, by default, they argue in favor of something they just voted to pass on to the membership.

Still, my experience has been that there is always a strong, obvious commitment to getting a T/A passed. Why is that necessary?

I feel exactly the same way. In fact, I don't think I could have said it better.

I dont read the TA like an english teacher trying to grade it. I read it as a pilot trying to figure out what it means.

However, even with that approach, the lawyers seem to be able to find a way around anything and/or (if there is a super good deal) DALPA gives them relief.

Sink r8 04-25-2012 06:24 AM

I'll agree to that last as well: I'm often surprised by the weakness in some of the language. For example, was I ever surprised when we tested the NFC in C2K with my very own job!

I suspect it's like any deal you negotiate: the true value of terms isn't always completely apparent until years later. I bought an extended warranty on our minivan. It's going to take a long while to tell if it was a good deal, or not.

So any contract has a bunch of fluff, items that are theoretically a huge improvement, based on the cliffnotes, assuming the economic environment and company finances hold up. But when a true test-to-press occurs, some work as intended, some do not. Some of these are better viewed as a weak insurance policy, than an iron-clad guarantee. I don't think this is a product of who negotiates. I think we have the appropriate professionals in the room. And even a Jerry Maguire would negotiate a bunch of fluff, to see what sticks.

Which is what makes it critically important to:
1) Have simple, clear, strong language in the most essential clauses.
2) Be informed, and involved, and not distracted by noise and/or any selling.
3) Compare the end product to your own initial requirements.
4) Ask questions, but be critical. Lean towards basing your consideration of a particular section on what it says, not an explanation of how it "should work".
5) Accept the fact that some of what you're getting is fluff, and learn to assign a value to that fluff based on the probability it will work out, not a certainty.

Sink r8 04-25-2012 06:26 AM

What did RA just say about a contract? I missed it while typing.

Bucking Bar 04-25-2012 06:33 AM

Delta values it relationship with its pilots. Delta has gotten several contracts done with its pilots in a timely manner (ex: JPWA) and our competition takes about 5 years to do a contract.

Surprised - no question on the oil refinery or aircraft acquisitions, thus far.

Sink r8 04-25-2012 06:34 AM

Thanks.....

Denny Crane 04-25-2012 06:34 AM


Originally Posted by DeadHead (Post 1175332)
I guessing you probably didn't tell your kids that you were interested in "constructive engagement".

I'm wildly fascinated with the word semantics we are fed sometimes. I think it all depends on management's interpretation of the word "demand", it's not personal, it's a negotiation. I don't feel as though taking a stance should be interpreted as a move of disinterest towards "constructive engagement".

That's just me though...

I pretty much agree with all you said above. Yes, it is a matter of semantics and how one interprets the written/spoken word. I highly doubt our negotiating team is "demanding" anything. My guess is they are "negotiating" which involves going back and forth. Don't get me wrong, this contract has to be a BIG positive for the pilot group but it is still a negotiation.

Denny

Denny Crane 04-25-2012 06:39 AM


Originally Posted by Grumble (Post 1175344)
Just to stoke the fire, if your kids sit around the house and don't do anything, does your mortgage still get paid?

Stoke away but you lost me on this comment. Of course, yes it does. But what does that have to do with them coming and "demanding" I buy them a car? Better for them to put up a reasoned argument that me buying them a car actually helps me out by not having to drive them around for whatever reason!!!

Denny


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:48 PM.


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