Notices

Details on Delta TA

Old 07-27-2014, 05:57 AM
  #101  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare View Post
Which means that you would blatantly lie to your constituency.

And there comes a time when negotiations are done. Unfortunately, it is not always on your terms. But your former NC were clearly badazzes, that forced it's will on the former management that you suffered under, right. GMAB Carl.
Once again you're not listening or comprehending. No surprise there.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 06:27 AM
  #102  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Hillbilly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 938
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
Don't know if they waited. Just know they accepted what was passed across the table to them because they knew what management's Plan B would be if they didn't. But hey, time value of money and not angering our partner is important.
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
Because at the road shows, the responsible MEC administrators and NC members said exactly this to people who advised voting no. They said it was the best we'll get, and any return to the bargaining table would likely result in a worse deal, the NMB wouldn't back us, and the company has a Plan B to do what they wanted without us...and we wouldn't like that plan B. Those same administrators who post here said the same thing here.

That's how I know.

Carl
I think it's stuff like this where you lose people Carl. I don't believe the vast majority honestly thinks that the negotiators just took what was handed to them across the table with no effort to maximize our return. That would be an exaggeration for effect by trying to paint something in the extreme. I also recall hearing that the company had a plan B and it was the MEC's belief that plan B would not garner us the same or better improvements to our PWA, like the minimum mainline block hour ratios associated with the small jet scope, based on the information they had.

While one might have wanted more (or a lot more for that matter), it doesn't mean the negotiators surrendered. I'm of the opinion they got what they thought they could get. I've never had the impression that they would stop trying to get more if they thought there was a calculated chance of a successful outcome for the pilot group. I don't view them as some miscreants trying to do me harm. I view them as my fellow pilots, with the help of professionals, trying the best they can to get the most they can for all of us. That's just my opinion.

Unfortunately, stuff like this on this forum usually seems to go on and on and on and on and on.
Hillbilly is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 06:29 AM
  #103  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,920
Default

I was reading out our contract history. If ALPA has financial experts, why didn't ALPA know that a bankruptcy was coming and there was nothing we could do about it? Painful reading about taking huge pay cuts, then going bankrupt and having to negotiate more cuts. To me our financial experts should have been able to tell is that the numbers din't work and bankruptcy was inevitable. I am guessing that we as a whole acted on emotion and fear of losing the pension. This was a major failure of ALPA. This was a time where we needed true leadership to keep us from acting on emotion, and I feel ALPA failed miserably. It resulted in deeper cuts than were necessary and a new lower standard for us IMHO. Relaxing the rj scope was another major failure during this time.
hockeypilot44 is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 06:37 AM
  #104  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Hillbilly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 938
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
The truth Alan, and that's what used to happen years ago. The NC would never come back parroting company talking points. If I was the NC chairman I would have said: "the company is not even negotiating. They want us to accept a substandard deal that does not meet the pilot's survey and they're demanding reductions in profit sharing which the reps have specifically rejected. They're now threatening to use their Plan B against us if we don't vote yes. I recommend this company proposal gets sent out to the pilots for a vote with a NO vote recommendation from the NC and the full MEC."

That's what I would have done. That's the way it used to be done, but we never operated under the one way hallucination of "constructive engagement."



See above. You don't strike the deal. You tell the company you demand actual negotiations...not bad faith "our way or the highway" ultimatums. If there's still no movement, you send the proposal out to the pilots for them to decide.

That's bottom-up control in my view.

Carl
Have you previously received something from your MEC to vote on that had a recommendation of a "no" vote from the NC and the MEC during the course of your career?
Hillbilly is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 06:41 AM
  #105  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Hillbilly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 938
Default

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 View Post
I was reading out our contract history. If ALPA has financial experts, why didn't ALPA know that a bankruptcy was coming and there was nothing we could do about it? Painful reading about taking huge pay cuts, then going bankrupt and having to negotiate more cuts. To me our financial experts should have been able to tell is that the numbers din't work and bankruptcy was inevitable. I am guessing that we as a whole acted on emotion and fear of losing the pension. This was a major failure of ALPA. This was a time where we needed true leadership to keep us from acting on emotion, and I feel ALPA failed miserably. It resulted in deeper cuts than were necessary and a new lower standard for us IMHO. Relaxing the rj scope was another major failure during this time.
You are not alone in that thinking. Interestingly enough, the Master Chairman that ushered in the concessions to "avoid bankruptcy" got replaced when we got to bankruptcy.
Hillbilly is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 06:47 AM
  #106  
No longer cares
 
tsquare's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
Once again you're not listening or comprehending. No surprise there.

Carl
Yeah you're right. I wasn't listening. I'd rather listen to a little Daid Gilmour... It's the same old bull dung that you make up on the fly to garner sympathy for your agenda. ALPA wronged you somehow, and it's your goal to send them to the scrap heap. Of course, now that you have yours and won't be affected by the repercussions.
tsquare is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 07:04 AM
  #107  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
I think it's stuff like this where you lose people Carl.
Off the top of my head, I can't recall you ever agreeing with me. So when you try to counsel me on how I might be losing people, I don't think you have an accurate picture of who I've won or lost.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
I don't believe the vast majority honestly thinks that the negotiators just took what was handed to them across the table with no effort to maximize our return. That would be an exaggeration for effect by trying to paint something in the extreme.
If there was any real negotiations, it couldn't have been much. The time was so short and threats by management were so many.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
I also recall hearing that the company had a plan B and it was the MEC's belief that plan B would not garner us the same or better improvements to our PWA, like the minimum mainline block hour ratios associated with the small jet scope, based on the information they had.
It was not the MEC's belief. It was the NC's belief and that of certain MEC administrators, but not the MEC. Our MEC was put in a no-win situation by the NC and certain administrators.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
While one might have wanted more (or a lot more for that matter), it doesn't mean the negotiators surrendered.
How about you? Might you have wanted more?

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
I'm of the opinion they got what they thought they could get. I've never had the impression that they would stop trying to get more if they thought there was a calculated chance of a successful outcome for the pilot group.
If that was true, those negotiators would still be here along with those administrators. They're all gone now and they're gone as a result of their actions. They don't get to decide whether there's a calculated chance of a greater outcome by pushing for more. The MEC gets to make that decision. That didn't happen. The NC signed the TA when they knew it specifically did not meet the pilot's survey and gave up profit sharing which the MEC prohibited them from doing.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
I don't view them as some miscreants trying to do me harm.
I don't view them as miscreants either.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
I view them as my fellow pilots, with the help of professionals, trying the best they can to get the most they can for all of us. That's just my opinion.
My opinion is the opposite. Others agree with me...that's why those folks are no longer serving.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
Unfortunately, stuff like this on this forum usually seems to go on and on and on and on and on.
You seem to be lamenting legitimate debate on this forum. Why?

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 07:07 AM
  #108  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 7ER Capt
Posts: 461
Default

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 View Post
I was reading out our contract history. If ALPA has financial experts, why didn't ALPA know that a bankruptcy was coming and there was nothing we could do about it? Painful reading about taking huge pay cuts, then going bankrupt and having to negotiate more cuts. To me our financial experts should have been able to tell is that the numbers din't work and bankruptcy was inevitable. I am guessing that we as a whole acted on emotion and fear of losing the pension. This was a major failure of ALPA. This was a time where we needed true leadership to keep us from acting on emotion, and I feel ALPA failed miserably. It resulted in deeper cuts than were necessary and a new lower standard for us IMHO. Relaxing the rj scope was another major failure during this time.
This eggzactly!

If we had such a great E & FA, they should have easily been able to tell us that with our debt load, bankruptcy avoidance/pension saving was impossible. I'm not a financial guy at all, but I voted no because even I could figure out the aforementioned avoidance/saving was impossible.

Further, our legal system is based on precedent. I doubt that there is any case law where a corporation was allowed to take 32% plus pensions from the employees thru the bankruptcy process.
LivingTheDream is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 07:07 AM
  #109  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
Have you previously received something from your MEC to vote on that had a recommendation of a "no" vote from the NC and the MEC during the course of your career?
Yes, twice in my career that I recall. Two NO vote recommendations and one "no recommendation" by the MEC.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 07:22 AM
  #110  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 View Post
I was reading out our contract history. If ALPA has financial experts, why didn't ALPA know that a bankruptcy was coming and there was nothing we could do about it? Painful reading about taking huge pay cuts, then going bankrupt and having to negotiate more cuts. To me our financial experts should have been able to tell is that the numbers din't work and bankruptcy was inevitable. I am guessing that we as a whole acted on emotion and fear of losing the pension. This was a major failure of ALPA. This was a time where we needed true leadership to keep us from acting on emotion, and I feel ALPA failed miserably. It resulted in deeper cuts than were necessary and a new lower standard for us IMHO.
In fairness to ALPA's financial folks, it would have been difficult to determine whether managements would have pulled the bankruptcy trigger. In the case of the old Delta, some analysts at the time said they were in such bad shape that Delta was days away from liquidation. In the case of NWA, some analysts called it a contrived bankruptcy to freeze pensions and extract concessions when NWA was not even close to being insolvent.

ALPA financial folks likely had an accurate picture of each airline's financial health, but no accurate guess as to who would pull the bankruptcy trigger.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 View Post
Relaxing the rj scope was another major failure during this time.
That is 100% true. Now we're relaxing top end scope.

If ALPA ultimately fails, agreeing to the slow destruction of scope language will be the reason.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kilroy
ExpressJet
10671
01-11-2016 06:49 AM
FastDEW
Major
201
09-03-2011 06:42 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
ksatflyer
Hangar Talk
10
08-20-2008 09:14 PM
INAV8OR
Mergers and Acquisitions
66
05-15-2008 04:37 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices