Search
Notices

Details on Delta TA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-27-2014, 08:35 AM
  #121  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Alan Shore's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
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.
Agreed.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
That is 100% true. Now we're relaxing top end scope.
I'm not sure that's true. With my limited knowledge of Section 1 of our contract, I understand that we had little to no protection against international codesharing in the past, let alone these new-fangled "Joint Ventures." Only in the past several iterations has the contract added limitations to such arrangements, with at least a requirement to attempt negotiating a production balance, etc.

Could be wrong here.
Alan Shore is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 08:48 AM
  #122  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Alan Shore's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Default

Originally Posted by LivingTheDream View Post
I have no idea what happened with 2012... One minute I'm reading our chairman saying we won't rush or settle for an inferior product... the next minute I'm seeing a TA with two years of 3% pay increases, giving back profit sharing, etc. ... after only two months of a section 6 negotiation!

I don't know about the rest of you, but that didn't come any where close to what I put in my survey! (or any one I have flown with during the last two years...)

Obviously, for whatever reason, 62% disagreed with me.
Nor did it satisfy what I put in my survey, yet I was part of the 62%. The reason was that, in completing my survey, I was assuming a more traditional timeline with a TA some months after the amendable date (or later). Given the early completion date and the corresponding earlier-than-expected pay increases, we wound up about 14% higher a year after the amendable date than the JCBA (net of profit sharing reduction).

That, in addition to the other goodies, e.g., vacation and CQ training pay, reserve guarantee, etc., to put me over the top.
Alan Shore is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 08:54 AM
  #123  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Alan Shore's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
Those "negotiations" that culminated in TA2012 occurred entirely outside of Section 6.
That is what I understand to have been the case.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
We took the company's proposal before Section 6 even began.
Back to the same old argument from you. Let's at least debate the issues from a factual standpoint, and not from a standpoint of declaring things to be true of which we have no personal knowledge.

Or is your intent something other than to have an honest and open debate?
Alan Shore is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 09:06 AM
  #124  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Alan Shore's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
If there was any real negotiations, it couldn't have been much. The time was so short and threats by management were so many.
At least you're now recognizing the possibility that there may actually have been some amount of real negotiations. I think we're getting somewhere!!

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
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.
Apparently, it was the MEC's belief in the end, as they voted to approve the TA. Or are you saying that ever voting down a TA brought forth with recommend by the NC is a no-win situation?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
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.
Actually, two out of the four are back -- MC and HK. Neither PO nor DV ran this time around, so it would be speculation at best as to whether either would have been re-elected.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
You seem to be lamenting legitimate debate on this forum.
In my previous post, I ask you the same question. Let's all stick to what we personally know and at least accurately ID those of our statements that reflect our opinion, belief, or suspicions. A discussion from that perspective, IMO, will give us the most legitimate and honest debate.
Alan Shore is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 09:39 AM
  #125  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
Default

Originally Posted by Alan Shore View Post
Nor did it satisfy what I put in my survey, yet I was part of the 62%. The reason was that, in completing my survey, I was assuming a more traditional timeline with a TA some months after the amendable date (or later). Given the early completion date and the corresponding earlier-than-expected pay increases, we wound up about 14% higher a year after the amendable date than the JCBA (net of profit sharing reduction).

That, in addition to the other goodies, e.g., vacation and CQ training pay, reserve guarantee, etc., to put me over the top.
You voted yes. I sincerely hope you learned a lesson or have had some first hand experiences to make you regret that decision. If you have no regrets or cannot see the mistake then it is indicative of a cultural and educational issue we have at this particular airline. What many have realized is that early contract may likely turn into a 4 to 6 year contract as the company stonewalls our restoration of QOL. Our vacation and CQ training pay is hardly anything to brag about, are you really serious about that pushing you over the top? The fact we are working 5-6 more days a month than SWA to match their average line credit is embarrassing. I am embarrassed we passed C2012.

As we get pushed harder and harder, where is ALPA safety? Where is the representation when we have 14 hour days, 10:00 overnights followed by another 11-13 hour duty day into a hotel that our own hotel commitee rejects? A requirement spelled out in the PWA. The answer is the company does not respect us, they have done an impressive job of destroying what profession existed and convincing our own union we are just employees.
TOGA LK is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 09:46 AM
  #126  
At home on the maddog!
 
DAL 88 Driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
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.
I agree. And then they made it even worse when Delta came out of bankruptcy and they acted like we had accepted bankruptcy level compensation as some kind of new standard with no expectation of restoration.

That even continues to this day... with Delta making literally BILLIONS in profits. Ask any of the "leadership" in DALPA if we have an objective for restoration. Crickets. They're more worried about stepping on RA's or EB's toes. UNSAT.
DAL 88 Driver is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 09:49 AM
  #127  
At home on the maddog!
 
DAL 88 Driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Default

Originally Posted by Hillbilly View Post
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.
And his replacement amplified the mistake by ushering in even more concessions and setting us on a course that essentially takes restoration off the table.
DAL 88 Driver is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 09:57 AM
  #128  
Gets Weekends Off
 
poostain's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 351
Default

Originally Posted by TOGA LK View Post
You voted yes. I sincerely hope you learned a lesson or have had some first hand experiences to make you regret that decision. If you have no regrets or cannot see the mistake then it is indicative of a cultural and educational issue we have at this particular airline. What many have realized is that early contract may likely turn into a 4 to 6 year contract as the company stonewalls our restoration of QOL. Our vacation and CQ training pay is hardly anything to brag about, are you really serious about that pushing you over the top? The fact we are working 5-6 more days a month than SWA to match their average line credit is embarrassing. I am embarrassed we passed C2012.

As we get pushed harder and harder, where is ALPA safety? Where is the representation when we have 14 hour days, 10:00 overnights followed by another 11-13 hour duty day into a hotel that our own hotel commitee rejects? A requirement spelled out in the PWA. The answer is the company does not respect us, they have done an impressive job of destroying what profession existed and convincing our own union we are just employees.
This ^^^^^^^^^! People like talk about TVM but what about TV of life? Quality of life is my biggest priority and I feel that being chipped away with every new rule, loa, contract, or FAR. I am a DALPA supporter but i sometimes question what their priority and direction is. Yes, I engage my reps, do the call to actions, and pay into the pac. Problem is a lot of times talking to dalpa guy is like listening to a management mouth piece. Shout me down if you like but this perspective is not limited to me.
poostain is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 09:59 AM
  #129  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Hillbilly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 938
Default

Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver View Post
And his replacement amplified the mistake by ushering in even more concessions and setting us on a course that essentially takes restoration off the table.

So there would have been no additional concessions to come through bankruptcy if JM had remained at the helm? He was good, but I think getting out from under the thumb of a judge during an 1113 unscathed is pretty lofty for anyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hillbilly is offline  
Old 07-27-2014, 10:05 AM
  #130  
At home on the maddog!
 
DAL 88 Driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Default

Originally Posted by Alan Shore View Post
Nor did it satisfy what I put in my survey, yet I was part of the 62%. The reason was that, in completing my survey, I was assuming a more traditional timeline with a TA some months after the amendable date (or later). Given the early completion date and the corresponding earlier-than-expected pay increases, we wound up about 14% higher a year after the amendable date than the JCBA (net of profit sharing reduction).

That, in addition to the other goodies, e.g., vacation and CQ training pay, reserve guarantee, etc., to put me over the top.
Serious question, Alan. How would you answer the following question?

"Given the history of Delta pilot compensation, the concessions we took associated with Delta's bankruptcy, and the progress/improvements we've made since Delta emerged from bankruptcy, what should be our objective going forward?"

In my opinion, any progress we make should be measured against our objective. The actions we take, the communications we put out, and the tone we set should be consistent with our objective. If we set a tone and send a message that our objective is something much different from what it really is, then that is counterproductive.

Those are some of the reasons why I voted NO on C2012. I'd like to hear more about your reasons within the context of your expectations and your view of what our objective should be.
DAL 88 Driver 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



Your Privacy Choices