Details on Delta TA
05-21-2015, 09:56 AM
#4481
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Lowest Pay I Could Find
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by index
I've heard the same thing.
Also that basically the only things that have been agreed to thus far have been CONCESSIONS. Apparently the NC, Chairman, and 11 reps want to scratch every itch the company has.
AF/KLM "not worth much" and going to get rolled in to the agreement.
Sick leave changes are coming too. Any guess who they benefit?
And if you (sailing) believe that pay and PS haven't been discussed...
Just sayin.
TA next week.
Also that basically the only things that have been agreed to thus far have been CONCESSIONS. Apparently the NC, Chairman, and 11 reps want to scratch every itch the company has.
AF/KLM "not worth much" and going to get rolled in to the agreement.
Sick leave changes are coming too. Any guess who they benefit?
And if you (sailing) believe that pay and PS haven't been discussed...
Just sayin.
TA next week.
05-21-2015, 10:10 AM
#4483
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
The AF/KLM scope violation cost us over one hundred widebody flying jobs. The equilivant of 9 rounds trips per years to AMS.
The management tool and brain of the shadow MEC says it is worth nothing and we roll it into C2015.
All for nothing.
Self funding with reduction in profit sharing. If it were neutral as the kool aids say, WHY WOULD MANAGEMENT WANT IT?
Can you say self funding? Get used to it.
And if that is not enough, many concessions that reduce staffing. Reduced staffing that will slow upgrades and stagnate our position on the bid list.
I have to admit I understand why the MEC Chairman, NC and Shadow MEC want all these concessions. We are after all losing money and near bankruptcy.
Oh wait...................
It's not a union, it's not an association, it's a glee club.
The management tool and brain of the shadow MEC says it is worth nothing and we roll it into C2015.
All for nothing.
Self funding with reduction in profit sharing. If it were neutral as the kool aids say, WHY WOULD MANAGEMENT WANT IT?
Can you say self funding? Get used to it.
And if that is not enough, many concessions that reduce staffing. Reduced staffing that will slow upgrades and stagnate our position on the bid list.
I have to admit I understand why the MEC Chairman, NC and Shadow MEC want all these concessions. We are after all losing money and near bankruptcy.
Oh wait...................
It's not a union, it's not an association, it's a glee club.
05-21-2015, 10:43 AM
#4484
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 429
Originally Posted by gloopy
717. A321. 737-900. A350. Possible 787s…
It was a perpetual hammer that was always going to be in the tool chest. Even an incompetent country club job hopper like LEOtheCEO could see that. Smart of him (from management's perspective) to get rid of it.
It was a perpetual hammer that was always going to be in the tool chest. Even an incompetent country club job hopper like LEOtheCEO could see that. Smart of him (from management's perspective) to get rid of it.
05-21-2015, 10:52 AM
#4485
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by index
I've heard the same thing.
Also that basically the only things that have been agreed to thus far have been CONCESSIONS. Apparently the NC, Chairman, and 11 reps want to scratch every itch the company has.
AF/KLM "not worth much" and going to get rolled in to the agreement.
Sick leave changes are coming too. Any guess who they benefit?
And if you (sailing) believe that pay and PS haven't been discussed...
Just sayin.
TA next week.
Also that basically the only things that have been agreed to thus far have been CONCESSIONS. Apparently the NC, Chairman, and 11 reps want to scratch every itch the company has.
AF/KLM "not worth much" and going to get rolled in to the agreement.
Sick leave changes are coming too. Any guess who they benefit?
And if you (sailing) believe that pay and PS haven't been discussed...
Just sayin.
TA next week.
05-21-2015, 11:52 AM
#4486
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
Originally Posted by index
You are not wrong. In fact, you are 100% correct.
Those that are still thinking that this time will be different are going to be sorely disappointed.
Those that are still thinking that this time will be different are going to be sorely disappointed.
ALPA has to be worried they would not survive another C2012.
2 things have to occur:
1) This contract has to be a huge gain for the pilots.
Some give and take? Sure. But a huge gain.
2) The process has to be "clean".
The permanent ALPA guys or "shadow MEC" or whatever you want to call them, can NOT be seen as having subverted the will of the pilot's elected reps or having any other undue influence on the outcome. That can't happen again.
If those 2 things do not occur I think you would see some serious, credible people step up and either start a new organization, or more likely, assume leadership of the DPA. ALPA would then be removed as the bargaining agent for the Delta pilots.
This contract is critical. For the Delta pilots AND for ALPA.
05-21-2015, 11:55 AM
#4487
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by pilotstats
thank you. I'm glad that you agree with my analysis. You and i are quite in agreement that the "devil is in the details". See above from the original scenario posed. Of course it is vital to evaluate the remainder of the deal! I would not state otherwise.
The original was exercise to show that when controlling for other variables, a profit-sharing to pay conversion is just that, a conversion... Not a concession.
It will help us all if we are using the same definitions, so let me know if you agree or not with the following in a contractual context:
concession- the act of removing a contractual provision or protection where either: Value is lost, no quid is made, no value is added elsewhere. Party a has a reduced value of their agreement going forward, and party b has increased it's value within the agreement.
exchange/conversion/trade-when two parties alter a contract where party a reduces the value of a provision or protection, and receives that value elsewhere in an agreement at the expense of party b. Also known as a "quid". Overall value remains the same to parties a and b, but the value is shifted to different areas than before the change.
improvement/gains-where party a is able to increase the value of an agreement above and beyond the status quo. The end result being greater for party a than prior to the modified agreement.
Do you agree with those definitions?
Not at all. Not sure where it was stated "must be given up", those are your words not mine. I wholly disagree with that philosophy! Profit sharing is not bad, it's quite valuable actually (as the last few years have finally shown). I expect that the value will continue to be there over the next few years.
Your second comment is rather insulting, some of us(maybe not you) have actually been on the receiving end of a ford and harrison campaign, it's ugly, destructive, and has hurt many families over the years. I kindly ask that you refrain from attempting to apply that description to me.
If you notice, i agree with you in regards to valuation issues.
The original was exercise to show that when controlling for other variables, a profit-sharing to pay conversion is just that, a conversion... Not a concession.
It will help us all if we are using the same definitions, so let me know if you agree or not with the following in a contractual context:
concession- the act of removing a contractual provision or protection where either: Value is lost, no quid is made, no value is added elsewhere. Party a has a reduced value of their agreement going forward, and party b has increased it's value within the agreement.
exchange/conversion/trade-when two parties alter a contract where party a reduces the value of a provision or protection, and receives that value elsewhere in an agreement at the expense of party b. Also known as a "quid". Overall value remains the same to parties a and b, but the value is shifted to different areas than before the change.
improvement/gains-where party a is able to increase the value of an agreement above and beyond the status quo. The end result being greater for party a than prior to the modified agreement.
Do you agree with those definitions?
Not at all. Not sure where it was stated "must be given up", those are your words not mine. I wholly disagree with that philosophy! Profit sharing is not bad, it's quite valuable actually (as the last few years have finally shown). I expect that the value will continue to be there over the next few years.
Your second comment is rather insulting, some of us(maybe not you) have actually been on the receiving end of a ford and harrison campaign, it's ugly, destructive, and has hurt many families over the years. I kindly ask that you refrain from attempting to apply that description to me.
If you notice, i agree with you in regards to valuation issues.
05-21-2015, 12:04 PM
#4488
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
I was told by a reputable individual when we were stuck at the end negotiating C2K that DALPA wouldn't sign without retro pay and improved Express rates and DAL would never be held hostage by 3B6 again. Anyway, ancient history. I don't believe any other carrier ever had such a provision. OFG
05-21-2015, 12:07 PM
#4489
Wind the clock beoch
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 437
Originally Posted by sailingfun
Well I guess at the time I made the statement the two reps I spoke with were lying.
I have no doubt they were telling the truth. That doesn't mean THEY weren't lied to. Or maybe just not told the whole truth. If you think the MEC is running the show you are living in a fantasy world. The NC and Master Chairman, along with the Shadow MEC do. They are the real power players. The rest, like you and I, are along for the ride.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
I guess the other pilots who spoke with their reps had lying reps also.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
Then several days later the negotiating committee put out a letter where they unequivocally stated no pay proposals had been exchanged.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
We're they also liars?
The reps are the next last to know what's going on. We're the last. The Chief Pilots likely know more of what's going on at the table than the MEC.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
You guys are acting like a bunch of flight attendants latching on to every rumor anyone with a Internet connection can post.
Are you going to do the same thing again this time, or are you just going to come out of the chute strongly for it? What's your strategy this time? Going to mix it up or go with what worked last time?
Last edited by index; 05-21-2015 at 12:33 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
