Airline Pilot Central Forums - Details on Delta TA

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?

Of course.

Next question for you: When this TA comes out with pay rate increases and reductions in profit sharing, will you consider it an Exchange/Conversion/Trade?

Carl

Carl Spackler

05-21-2015 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilotstats (Post 1885291)

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.

Then why are you working as hard as you possibly can to make the case that profit sharing can be lowered or traded?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilotstats (Post 1885291)

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're truly insulted by that reference and want me to refrain from describing you that way, then stop deserving it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pilotstats (Post 1885291)

If you notice, I agree with you in regards to valuation issues.

No we don't. You're confusing past value calculations with future calculations. You're wanting to monetize future profit sharing without knowing the future. It's exactly what the MEC administration has been spouting for some time now.

Carl

Carl Spackler

05-21-2015 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D Mantooth (Post 1885335)

I'd be remiss if I didn't add that there'd have been no UAL c2k rates had they not (successfully and admirably) patterned off of the "Delta Dot."

Despite attacks on their fortitude and unionism, I'm grateful that many of the men who brought us the "Dot" and C2k are still working on our behalf.

Let me guess: You're grateful for Harwood, White, Donutelli, Hazzard, etc? :rolleyes:

Yup DALPA working on behalf of pilots. [face palm]

Carl

Carl Spackler

05-21-2015 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D Mantooth (Post 1885363)

The actions of many on this and other boards who ridicule and vilify anyone remotely connected to DALPA certainly have a very real price.

The actions of many in the MEC administration that went around our reps and ignored our process have a much higher price.

Carl

OldFlyGuy

05-21-2015 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 1885636)

NWA did as well. Side letter #1.

Stand corrected. I thought all other agreements said if you couldn't negotiate a rate you arbitrated. At DAL we could stonewall and park the jets. OFG

Purple Drank

05-21-2015 03:59 PM

Confirmed through multiple sources:

- MEC approved invasive sick leave investigations
- MEC approved removing LCA trips from FO PBS options

- NC member broke down crying and threatened to quit when he received pushback from the MEC.

I can't even fathom that. One of the guys sitting at the table for us--he's supposed to be getting us the best possible deal!--is so far in the tank for the company, he started crying when he couldn't persuade an already weak MEC to agree to more concessions.

It's sickening.

http://files.shandymedia.com/images/...ggifs_01_1.gif

Purple Drank

05-21-2015 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1885812)

Let me guess: You're grateful for Harwood, White, Donutelli, Hazzard, etc? :rolleyes:

Yup DALPA working on behalf of pilots. [face palm]

Carl

D Mantooth sounds exactly like that Curly guy (hatchet man for the entrenched bureaucrats).

Carl Spackler

05-21-2015 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 1885627)

I don't think so.
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.

I'm not too sure about this Check. As I've been saying for some time now, our union has been purchased right out from under us. DALPA doesn't represent Delta pilots, they represent Delta management. It's a pretend Union. But here's the interesting part: By a 10-9 margin, this is EXACTLY what Delta line pilots want...a fake Union. One that will never challenge Mother Delta.

There's a chance that a slim majority of our pilot group could vote down a TA that's ratified by the reps if it's just too insulting. That's the only weapon we have against a union that is owned by non-members.

Carl

Carl Spackler

05-21-2015 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1885631)

acl65?...........

No, acl65 was one of the most purely political hacks I'd ever seen. He was completely incapable of a straight answer. Every statement filled with escape hatches if needed for future denials.

This guy is at least direct. I'm guessing maybe the reincarnation of Bucking Bar?

Carl

Carl Spackler

05-21-2015 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flamer (Post 1885660)

Who is the shadow MEC? Do they fly the line or are they paid for with dues money to do something else??

Our MEC is supposed to be the reps. They've been rendered completely irrelevant by the shadow MEC. They consist of select MEC administrators who work to ensure the reps continued irrelevance and run the union top down. They cut Kingsley Roberts' throat because Kingsley didn't want this...he wanted the reps to run things bottom up. They're in full swing now with side negotiations and strategic planning of how to cram C2015 down everyone's throats by making it look like you'll lose less by a vote YES.

Hey, I think I just found Donutelli's new slogan for the C2015 sales job: "LOSE LESS BY VOTING YES!"

Carl

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:04 PM.

Page 451 of 1030

451

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page