I don't understand why giving into the bidding with LCAs and sick leave tightening(again) are even being discussed. These are a couple of the good things we have left.

On many issues, discussing the topic of the day and waging PR campaigns on Internet message boards is the only avenue the rank and file membership has to provide any input to the process before the TA is signed.

The MEC administration isn't going to publicly announce that they are negotiating any changes to the line check trip assignment system. It was not in the survey or any other documents published by ALPA.

These web boards are the only source we have.

12,000 people can't call their reps every day and ask "What's new in the negotiations?".

Guys who don't frequent these pages have no idea that first officers may lose the ability to bid trips with line check airmen. Or that those trips might be withheld from the F/O PBS run once a LCA is awarded them. That's something that a lot of pilots might have an opinion on and want to express that opinion to their reps.

We can argue about whether its a "done deal" but I think most pilots would like to at least be made aware that its under discussion.

The MEC administration is not communicating.
I'm grateful that Purple Drank is.

I will never understand why they negotiate items with no input in a vacuum. Apparently they have not seen smart phones yet. We could do a 12,000 pilot instant vote in two days.

Why negotiate LCA trips without first letting the membership know they were being talked about? I can't think of one reason.

The MEC may be going all honey badger again. Just don't GAS about the line guy.

I also can't understand why we would be talking about ANY concessions in today's economic environment SEVEN months prior to the amendable date.

Profit sharing and self funding is next up.

You nailed it, why oh why would we even discuss concessions that permanently reduce staffing during record profits?

More idiocy that only you are saying. I'm not picking a topic of the day. The concessions being discussed here are either already TA'd or are verbally agreed to by the NC. The redirection going on now is throwing the NC for a loop because the reps are really performing their rightful duties. I'm not undermining it, I'm praising it.

Regarding processes not being followed, you know that I'm referring to C2012 yet you say this anyway. It's why you have so little credibility. This is the Alinsky behavior that Harwood and the other far lefties on the MEC administration exhibit when they can't debate.

See above.

As previously discussed, you're just trying to squash a repeat of the CDO defeat for your team. You're doing that by telling everyone it's all a lie, in the hopes nobody will come with the pitchforks...until it's too late. You're a loyal soldier, but you don't control the communication methods anymore. I know that just kills you apologists and operatives.

I actually wish that hadn't leaked out because it's so embarrassing.

There's a shock.

It is necessary, but it shouldn't be happening. Harwood shouldn't be attempting to cut side deals with management that the reps have to fight against. The NC shouldn't have agreed to concessions that the reps now have to fight against. So yes it's necessary, but it was avoidable.

Carl

Just remember that when it comes time to vote. Your NO vote is a HUGE weapon that we Delta pilots rarely (if ever) use.

Carl

I understand about not negotiating in public. That's fine.

But just like the CDO/split duty thing -- this change to bidding with check airmen would be a pretty major change to our contract. There's no good reason to keep it secret. All they would have to do is put out a short memo saying that it is under consideration. No commitment one way or the other.

That wouldn't compromise the negotiations.

Not advocating it, but I can see why the company would want as this:

Lots of training coming up over the next decade +

Already behind on manpower to move the planes that they would like to move during favorable conditions.

Recapturing a certain amount of productivity (i.e. required work) of pilots displaced by IOE would allow for either less hiring and/or more flying with current pilot corps.

One man's concession is another's negotiation.


If your a negotiator and the deal is ready to go with current work rules and then the company says, recapture IOE displaced flying for an additional 2% across the board, what would you want your negotiator to do?

Say NO thank you? Say yes? Then the problem is how do you explain to the group that you had an immediate 10% raise negotiated but it was bumped to 12% based on IOE recovery flying?


What price is your "concession" worth?

We're in trouble. We need to get rid of ALPA before contract 2015 happens and more damage is done. I mean that. The organization is bought off and crooked.