Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

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)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferd149 (Post 1175571)

From home, it's training.

Thanks Ferd, I thought so...

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1175522)

So you are assuming that they will blindly vote no.. and that is somehow a good thing? Really? Wow, they must be dumber than I thought.

Nope, we're dumber than you thought:D

Ok, I knew I should have read all those reserve discussions over the years but........

They (as of 5 minutes ago or 1245ish ATL time) haven't assigned any short calls for tomorrow afternoon or Friday morning for SEA330B. Can that be right?

Ferd

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferd149 (Post 1175582)

Yep, they do not need to assign them until 1500 base time, and then only for those coming off of X days. For pilots that are on call today, all they need to do is give you 10 hrs of notice to convert you to a SC period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferd149 (Post 1175580)

Nope, we're dumber than you thought:D

Ferd;
Despite that fact :D its still not a good thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferd149 (Post 1175582)

Call them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1175535)

Good plan ace.. let's vote down anything just for the sake of voting it down. That will always work better.. :rolleyes: We will be uber bad a$$e$ then.

Example why did we vote in the last TA after we got NW. It was the same TA we just got and DALPA told us we would get a better deal once NW was with us and DALPA brings us a TA with the same stuff with just minor gains. Green Slip and SC from 8 to 6. Vote that down. Its passed. Thats what scares me.

Not uber bad a$$e, just want the best contract for Delta Air Lines Pilots. Why vote crap like that in after we lost pensions, on a 40% paycut, work rules slashed, SCOPE, and give the company a record SLI. I won't vote everything down just for the sake of voting it down. Just vote for a TA for that big gains for Delta Pilots. Not subpar stuff like the last one.

OK, never mind the malt, I'm just going to switch the real world back on. Honeydo lists don't take care of themselves.

Take it easy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1175570)

I think we all agree we want peace and quiet, and no sell-job. Ferd gave a very elegant method for the MEC to give a post-action summary, after which they can then shut up and let us decide.

I can do that right now and save the effort later....

In any section where the TA didn't live up to the polling data you can insert one of the following two answers:

1) Because the NC distributed that provisions' improvement cost/value elsewhere.

OR

2) Because the company said no, and the NC had no leverage to force the issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1175570)

I think there are guys that specialize in letting something pass, but not being on the record as being for it. This just gives them more of a platform. Either the MEC agrees to pass this on to ratify, or it doesn't. If it passes it on, it needs to do a paper such as Ferd suggested, which would serve the same purpose as a pro/con because it would give us something to chew on, EXCEPT it wouldn't let people take politically-motivated positions.

If I was trying my hand at populism, I would write the CON paper, arguing like crazy that we should have gotten MORE. That's amazingly simple to do. By keeping the inside politics inside, you avoid this.

I think we all agree we want peace and quiet, and no sell-job. Ferd gave a very elegant method for the MEC to give a post-action summary, after which they can then shut up and let us decide.

Maybe the idea of a "sell job" is a little over sensitive. I guess one could choose to look at the road shows that way, but As Scambo said, it is incumbent upon each of us to be our own expert. And THAT certainly entails looking at sections other than section 3 and section 1 for that matter. I trust those that were in the negotiating room at the time to try and get me the best deal that they can. If I don't believe that it is, then I will vote no. Unlike some other people around here, voting no for the sake of voting no is a moronic idea that I will not entertain. And FWIW, I certainly believe that the brothers from the north as a whole aren't insipid enough to believe that voting no "just because" is a good idea. Ferd excepted. :D