Notices

Details on Delta TA

Old 05-28-2015, 05:31 PM
  #4991  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Default

You didn't answer my question. Stop being obfuscatory and pedantic.

What is your solution for a process that yields a result. Because 2500 years of democratic evolution and parliamentary procedure is DYING to hear your better way.
Professor is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 05:37 PM
  #4992  
The Brown Dot +1
 
scambo1's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Default

Originally Posted by Professor
You didn't answer my question. Stop being obfuscatory and pedantic.

What is your solution for a process that yields a result. Because 2500 years of democratic evolution and parliamentary procedure is DYING to hear your better way.
A process that yields a result...that's a pretty low bar.

Look mommy I made a poo.

Concessions are coming to a TA in your neighborhood. Bi-winning, tiger blood, we'll get 'em next time.

Ssdd
scambo1 is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 05:42 PM
  #4993  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Default

Your solution, is 'better' 'more better' ????

Really.

Shall I quote 'the man in the arena' for you?
Professor is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 05:43 PM
  #4994  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Schwanker's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,233
Default

Originally Posted by Professor
So. By your logic the councils need to be unanimous or we just punt? Right guys?

Because this is EXACLTY, precisely what you are saying. Correct me if I'm wrong. Your position is, if a council dissents on direction...all bets are off for negotiating?

Then what? Then what in the holy name of Omni Omni Vortac do we do then? What is the path forward from that?

You just got a glimpse into the sausage factory because council one couldn't stfup and do their job. This is all post game stuff that can be discussed after we win. This is talking to your pitcher during a no hitter.

BUSH LEAGUE council 1. Bush. League.
No, it doesn't have to be unanimous. I don't think that's the contention.

The problem, as I see it, is MEC insiders are trying to usurp the LEC and direct the negotiations. To top it off, it appears this new direction doesn't live up to the expectations or desires of our membership (survey). In addition to this, the administration is shutting the LECs out of the process with respect to information flow. Yes, if this is the case, it's a huge problem. I think C1 is just sounding the alarm. Kudos to them!
Schwanker is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 05:43 PM
  #4995  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,049
Default

Originally Posted by Professor
So. By your logic the councils need to be unanimous or we just punt? Right guys?

Because this is EXACLTY, precisely what you are saying. Correct me if I'm wrong. Your position is, if a council dissents on direction...all bets are off for negotiating?

Then what? Then what in the holy name of Omni Omni Vortac do we do then? What is the path forward from that?

You just got a glimpse into the sausage factory because council one couldn't stfup and do their job. This is all post game stuff that can be discussed after we win. This is talking to your pitcher during a no hitter.

BUSH LEAGUE council 1. Bush. League.
Their "job" is to represent the wishes of their members.

My idea of a win must be much different than yours. After the game will be too late, ONCE AGAIN.
boog123 is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 05:45 PM
  #4996  
The Brown Dot +1
 
scambo1's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Default

Originally Posted by Professor
Your solution, is 'better' 'more better' ????

Really.

Shall I quote 'the man in the arena' for you?
Was that a coherent statement or some random stuff you typed? Is this how internal MEC communications goes?
scambo1 is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 06:08 PM
  #4997  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,049
Default

Originally Posted by Schwanker
No, it doesn't have to be unanimous. I don't think that's the contention.

The problem, as I see it, is MEC insiders are trying to usurp the LEC and direct the negotiations. To top it off, it appears this new direction doesn't live up to the expectations or desires of our membership (survey). In addition to this, the administration is shutting the LECs out of the process with respect to information flow. Yes, if this is the case, it's a huge problem. I think C1 is just sounding the alarm. Kudos to them!
I completely agree with this post.
boog123 is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 06:09 PM
  #4998  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Default

Originally Posted by scambo1
Was that a coherent statement or some random stuff you typed? Is this how internal MEC communications goes?
Put an 'or' between those two. Your ability to come back non-substantively and non-funnylike clearly has no end in sight.

Look I don't know what kind of paranoid rip-stop nylon cloth you and PD and gzsg were cut from but its rubbing most of us raw. Because instead of following the RULES, that we agree to by electing and supporting our local council reps, we end up playing this game of pre-established rules. If we don't there is havoc. Lawlessness PD actually sleeping with a girl. Its utter chaos.

Now, if any of you Awesomes on here would like to change those rules...run...petition...get involved etc. etc. Be a part of the solution..blah blah Get on board for the big win...blah blah....etc. etc.

Until that happens live in the now. You wail and rend your garments as if the End Days have arrived and you are about to lose your brand new Corvette in the driveway to a hailstorm of frogs sprinkled with brimstone.

The now is that some reps are unhappy with the process. THEY DID NOT SAY THE PROCESS ISN'T BEING FOLLOWED. They used the language of an unhappy minority:
"and we continue to struggle to keep the MEC's direction in line with your goals and expectations-a major part of the process"

If this is the case, why hasn't every LEC walked? If this is the case, are they talking about Council 1 pilots only? They must be because they are the only people THEY REPRESENT!!!

This is a Republic. Suck it up. Its the way it is. Think about a TA like a constitutional amendment. It gets debated and worked over and then disseminated to the states. Then those states have to ratify it individually. We are the states and MemRat is our, ahem, chance to ratify. Sorry, wasn't going there, it just worked out.

Anyway...I get the feeling that this is so much more fear based in you guys than not. You can't believe that either in this, or in your life, you aren't going to get screwed by someone else. Hey, maybe you, my all of us are about to get just that. Sans lubrication.

But hey maybe we are about to make C2K look like a pauper's salary.

I don't know. You don't know. That is the point. WE DON'T KNOW.

And until we do...half threats and innuendo by people who should be representing the best interests of the pilots they represent do nothing but undermine a process that they themselves say has NOT been broken...they just don't like the cards being dealt right now.
Professor is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 06:47 PM
  #4999  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: number cruncher
Posts: 22
Default

Originally Posted by Professor
I don't know. You don't know. That is the point. WE DON'T KNOW.

And until we do...half threats and innuendo by people who should be representing the best interests of the pilots they represent do nothing but undermine a process that they themselves say has NOT been broken...they just don't like the cards being dealt right now.
Post of the day.

Scenario: The MSP representatives are upset that reps in bases with co-terminal airports desire paid cab fare for pilots when rotations originate at the "less desirable" airports (i.e. EWR). The MSP reps feel that the MEC should seek gains for ALL Delta Pilots and not be subject to direction that is pure pork-barrel. However, the "cab fare seeking reps" have promised support to other bases who have parochial issues, and therefore gained a majority for their purposes.

In this instance, MSP reps have a right to be upset. They do not have the right to blame the NC; the NC takes its instruction from the MEC as a whole, and are bound to follow that majority position. What they do not have the right to do is air dirty laundry to everyone and undercut the unified voice of us to management. That hurts us all and takes money out of your future paychecks.

What C1 wrote and published was petulant, childish, destructive, and does not contribute to a positive outcome for Delta Pilots. This is a sad day for ALPA when it's 1st Local behaves like this. Not the kind of history they will want to be known for; history aside I hope the damage to our collective checking accounts can be mitigated.
pilotstats is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 07:01 PM
  #5000  
Where could U B tomorrow?
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 68
Default

I didn’t realize that Butt Head (you do know of his past behavior of head butting the MEC VC in MSP, don’t you?) was back on the MEC. And now Beavis, his FO rep, have decided to skewer the negotiators prior to even reaching an agreement. Carrying on the Council 1 tradition from 2012 of just saying NO to everything and likely carrying out the politics of personal attacks orchestrated by Detroit and their CVG FO lapdog.

These morons are costing every Delta pilot money.
Chuck Essential 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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices