Notices

Details on Delta TA

Old 11-28-2014 | 11:58 AM
  #3041  
Free Bird's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
No. Think about your post real hard. ONLY the members can help. OFG

DALPA has a relationship with this pilot group and the meeting attendance and the survey participation rate is a direct reflection of that relationship. It takes two to tango. It doesn't take one side saying "it's all your fault".

I go to meetings when I can, I participate in surveys and I also communicate my concerns to reps. It also just happens that I'm not thrilled with the direction the MEC is going. You know what OFG, I'm apparently not the only one.
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 01:08 PM
  #3042  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Free Bird
Low survey participation, low meeting attendance, yep, DALPA is firing on all cylinders!

Pro or anti DALPA, to not acknowledge that DALPA needs to change significantly to reverse the above trends is naïve. Only so much the members can do to help the cause.
Extremely difficult to rally the troops when a handful of guys running the union make the same mistakes over and over again. See AF/KLM JV cure period and what a losing proposition that has been only to be followed by a similar TA put out for Virgin Atlantic. Unconscionable what a handful of guys give away on behalf of this pilot group.
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 02:07 PM
  #3043  
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Call your reps and ask them about the survey results. I thought about posting what I was told on here but better people ask for themselves.
Sailing

Why were you told information about a confidential contract survey??

Jerry
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 02:52 PM
  #3044  
Carl Spackler's Avatar
Back on TDY
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy
Nice try at deflection, Carl. It won't be because of them, but if they fail to participate in the process, I have no intentions of listening to their whining.
It's not a deflection Pineapple, it's exactly on point. You lament about survey participation, but not a word of criticism of our "union" for not releasing the results. Worse, you'll blame those pilots, the RLA, NMB, or anything other than ALPA for the upcoming substandard C2015.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy
First, they say they don't want to run for office because that's too much work.
Only you say that Pineapple.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy
Then, they say they don't want to go to meetings, because they're a commuter.
Only you say that Pineapple.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy
Now, they say they can't even bother to fill out a survey?? And they then have the nerve to complain about the result? And complain that ALPA reps don't listen to them?
You have the exact same complaint and back of your hand to those of us that did fill it out and do participate. You believe that we should elect reps, then let them decide. Regardless of what they decide, you'll support them. That's the way you think it should work. Many of us disagree.

Carl
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 02:52 PM
  #3045  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by gzsg
Sailing

Why were you told information about a confidential contract survey??

Jerry
Nothing at all confidential about general statements on how the survey turned out. Again talk to your reps.
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 02:55 PM
  #3046  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by EdGrimley
Extremely difficult to rally the troops when a handful of guys running the union make the same mistakes over and over again. See AF/KLM JV cure period and what a losing proposition that has been only to be followed by a similar TA put out for Virgin Atlantic. Unconscionable what a handful of guys give away on behalf of this pilot group.
Can you contrast the TA with our current protections relative to Virgin? It sounds like you have studied it. I would love to hear some numbers showing how much we gave away.
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 03:07 PM
  #3047  
Carl Spackler's Avatar
Back on TDY
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Karnak
Why would you want to mischaracterize my statements?
He didn't mischaracterize you. That's exactly what your actions do, and you're OK with that. In fact, you think you're doing us a favor.

Originally Posted by Karnak
I want more money and better rules sooner rather than later..
No you don't Karnak. You want what's best for our management partners because you're all in on the Moak "trickle down" theory.

Originally Posted by Karnak
The "sooner" part chafes with you. I get that.
No, you just get chapped when people call you out on your real motivations. Even ALPA knows their trickle down theory would be rejected by the membership.

Originally Posted by Karnak
Your opinion on the acceptable value of our next contract is not shared by most Delta pilots. That part chafes with you. I get that too.
You have no idea what's acceptable to most Delta pilots this time. But the arrogance is typical of a member of the MEC administration.

Carl
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 03:17 PM
  #3048  
Carl Spackler's Avatar
Back on TDY
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Can you contrast the TA with our current protections relative to Virgin? It sounds like you have studied it. I would love to hear some numbers showing how much we gave away.
It's not the numbers sailingfun, the numbers seem fine. It's paragraph 1.R.3 which is the problem. Here it is again:

3. If the Company is not in compliance with the minimum international operation requirement (under Section 1 R. 1.) or the minimum ASK requirement (under Section 1 R. 2.) in any measurement period, the Company will cure any such breach by complying with the minimum international operation or ASK requirement, as applicable, in the subsequent measurement period.


Can't you see the danger here? Can't you see this will allow an every other year non-compliance and still be perfectly legal? Can't you see it allows for no penalties whatsoever for non-compliance other than a grievance? Can you speak to that specifically sailingfun?

Carl
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 03:22 PM
  #3049  
Free Bird's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Can you contrast the TA with our current protections relative to Virgin? It sounds like you have studied it. I would love to hear some numbers showing how much we gave away.
So you're saying that under the new TA there will be some teeth or consequences if the company knowingly violates our contract? I must of missed that.

We've already seen that mother Delta has no problem violating our contract.
Reply
Old 11-28-2014 | 03:50 PM
  #3050  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
It's not the numbers sailingfun, the numbers seem fine. It's paragraph 1.R.3 which is the problem. Here it is again:

3. If the Company is not in compliance with the minimum international operation requirement (under Section 1 R. 1.) or the minimum ASK requirement (under Section 1 R. 2.) in any measurement period, the Company will cure any such breach by complying with the minimum international operation or ASK requirement, as applicable, in the subsequent measurement period.


Can't you see the danger here? Can't you see this will allow an every other year non-compliance and still be perfectly legal? Can't you see it allows for no penalties whatsoever for non-compliance other than a grievance? Can you speak to that specifically sailingfun?

Carl
Carl, the teeth has always been the grievance process. It looks like the company will be very close to compliance on the current JV. We should have operated 48.5% of the EASK and it looks like we will come in around 47.8. The company is currently in compliance going forward. I fully expect my union to file a grievance on 1APR when the company is out of compliance.
If you built some penalty into the process and the company refused to comply with the penalty what then is your option? The grievance process. I suspect we tried to get some known penalty and the company refused. Would it then have been better to stay with what we currently have?
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kilroy
ExpressJet
10796
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