Contract 96 was the last time this tactic worked with me.

 

If you get a MD on an AE I know you have to rebid your vacation in your new position. Is there an option to carry the vacation over to the following year as opposed to rebidding it?

 

You keep your vacations if you were a MD. No rebid.

 

I post it because many on here seem to have a limited understanding of contract negotiations and how they progress under the NMB and RLA.
The first rule of negotiations that everyone needs to understand is that its all about leverage. Who has it and who does not. The 1113 process is the apex of leverage for management. A NMB release is the peak of leverage for labor. After that there are many levels and ways to gain leverage or lose it.
Contract negotiations can very quickly go south and turn from a cooperative venture to all out war. There have been many posts on here and the DALPA forum that suggest that as a union we should be in all out war with the company at all times. I simply don't think that is a smart strategy. At the moment we enjoy a pretty good working relationship with the company. That has allowed many things to be accomplished. In fact the mid contract changes and additional source of money to pilots have been almost unheard of in the airline industry. It also assures that we don't have to worry about 1000 airtran pilots showing up next week.
I am cautiously hopeful at this point because the company has not chosen to use or attempt to use some very obvious tools for leverage they have had at their disposal. Lets hope it stays that way.

 

Not necessarily. If you buy parts of an airline that are blow their fragmentation threshold, their contract provisions do not come in effect. As a result, taking the employees is optional.

If you bought airplanes from an airline, it depends on how the deal is structured and if the loss would cause furloughs. Again, it is does not trigger fragmentation language, employees do not necessarily need to come with. Airplanes can also be returned to the leasing company and then washed though there.

The only scenario where you would definitely see employees is if DAL chose to take part of say AMR that equated to more than their fragmentation language, or you bought someone like ALK, HAA or B6 in whole. I do not see the latter coming before the fate of AMR is known, not just assumed.

As for a my statement about culture, the melding of cultures costs money, and time. It also causes delays in getting to the efficiencies that brought about the transaction. I am sure at some point we will take employees, but I doubt it is DAL's first choice.

 

A good point, but they also understand that if they do, it is like using a "nuclear option." If they choose to do this;which they will not, it kills the last half decade of work they have been fostering with our association. The downside costs are just too great for an airline and management team that has plans they want to execute.

I would say that spending a few hundred more a year on our contract is by far cheaper that losing the constructive relationship we both enjoy.

 

HA HA HA!

I suspect they are just keeping their powder dry.

 

Our MEC & Delta flushed 415 Compass pilots without even blinking.

I think the litmus test for outrage around here is "is it below my seniority" ? If the answer to that question is "yes" then just about any behavior is considered "acceptable." So, when it comes to Delta and ALPA and something like a 717, absolutely nothing would surprise me. The difference between a 717 and a E175 is scant.

Like the frog in the pot, the incremental scope sales have avoided really scaring anyone because we get used to the new environment. However, I recall the first day I spent with the CRJ700 prototype and how it sure seemed like a MD-90. Amazing that airplane was being outsourced. Today, it is considered the "small" RJ. Incremental-ism. I can almost hear Chuck Giambusso and Bill Buergey saying, "but hey, that's not what we had in mind." However, when you decided against unity ... the result is a mathematical certainty.

From a corporate perspective Delta needs to get some guys on board with less longevity. We've got topped out First Officers on our smallest equipment. More efficient to have guys on year one pay there and have the 12 year guys on widebodies where they earn their keep with higher ASM production.

 

You get paid for whichever trip has the higher value. (Section 11.B.5.)

 

All good points Bar, but as you know CPS was off our seniority list, and as a result most did not see that as a direct loss of Delta Pilot jobs. Second, they see it as DCI, and therefore not Delta Pilot Jobs. Third, no one sees the 717 or anything about 76 seats that way, and there would be outrage. DAL knows that.

As for needed new bodies, yes, I agree, and it will happen soon enough. When it does we will not stop hiring for decades.