Details on Delta TA
#5271
The past has been a long series of... that crap, with two identifiable groups slugging it out, and the rest of us along for the ride. The JCBA, the SLI, the Compass vote, C2012, the DPA, the recall, the 117 TA, this, it's all been different battlegrounds for the same war. The tactics haven't even changed. You could rewind the L&G back to 2012, and plug about 150 pages right in this thing. It's predictable that any college-bound kid could predict the next communications from any given council.
And it hasn't done any good.
Moving forward, I think we have to unite around ideas that work, strategies that work, and decide on results. This pre-supposes 1) respect for the process, and 2) the right of the Delta pilots to decide for themselves based on actual language. That's the side I think we should all be on.
And it hasn't done any good.
Moving forward, I think we have to unite around ideas that work, strategies that work, and decide on results. This pre-supposes 1) respect for the process, and 2) the right of the Delta pilots to decide for themselves based on actual language. That's the side I think we should all be on.
#5272
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Well played, and pretty funny! Using North Korea as a metaphor is something I couldn't do, but when you do it...
I don't want the pilots to keep quiet, but in what universe would you expect the boss to express public doubt about his attorney in what he describes as the end-state of a plea-bargain? I expect the reps to be quiet. We should be drowning in speculation by pilots, debate by pilots, input from pilots. Instead, we're getting syncronized mass, public displays of confusion, politics, and more mass.
What's so ironic is that you're the one who is trying to stifle discourse based on these legitimate concerns and sentiments. Undoubtedly, you're doing so for a political purpose. The loss to all would occur if we line pilots remained silent as you are urging us to do. Your statement should read: "at a gain for those members, but at a loss for those of us trying to parrot the MEC admin's message." We'll just have to live with the guilt Sink r8.
Last edited by Sink r8; 05-31-2015 at 03:40 PM.
#5273
Sailing,
I refer you to post 5225. It's back a few pages. I posted that to flush out the 37% number because I didn't have a document citing it. Without that my claim would be unsubstantiated. The logic is correct. I have already shown the 2015 first two quarters profit sharing are trending well above 2014. (it's back a little further)
The 4.5 number was used to lowball the PTIX assuming reduction in total profit sharing when the other employee groups get cut. And it's a good red herring because that is a well known number.
28.8 was my number. I will concede yours 20+%. I think we are roughly in agreement. I still welcome your scrutiny.
I refer you to post 5225. It's back a few pages. I posted that to flush out the 37% number because I didn't have a document citing it. Without that my claim would be unsubstantiated. The logic is correct. I have already shown the 2015 first two quarters profit sharing are trending well above 2014. (it's back a little further)
The 4.5 number was used to lowball the PTIX assuming reduction in total profit sharing when the other employee groups get cut. And it's a good red herring because that is a well known number.
28.8 was my number. I will concede yours 20+%. I think we are roughly in agreement. I still welcome your scrutiny.
Last edited by notEnuf; 05-31-2015 at 03:25 PM.
#5274
Undoubtedly management has re crunched their own numbers.
I agree. Management has crunched and dissected their own numbers, and our DALPA experts have crunched and dissected management's numbers.
Sure would be great if our union had independent economic and financial analysts.
Oh wait.
Carl
Sure would be great if our union had independent economic and financial analysts.
Oh wait.
Carl
#5275
Again, I think that's a mistake...but the reps are in charge.
Carl
#5276
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
So it's really TWO old guards fighting for control of the MEC, and the TA is but a backdrop for that interminable saga.
#5277
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Because they are trying to get the NC to remember they work at their behest instead of just firing them. I would fire them immediately, but the reps get to decide that. The reps have decided that it will inure to the greater benefit of this pilot group if they can get this NC to work per their direction instead of the direction of the unelected MEC administration.
Again, I think that's a mistake...but the reps are in charge.
Again, I think that's a mistake...but the reps are in charge.
#5278
Of course you do, you just don't seem to like your clearance when it's read back to you.
You'll understand if I think your analogy to a criminal trial is pretty dopey...right?
The correct analogy is an athlete that has concerns that his agent has been co-opted by the team owners and that agent is no longer negotiating on the athlete's behalf. Said athlete has two choices: 1. Fire the agent and continue negotiations with a new one, or 2. Express doubt publicly about the agent in the hopes said agent knows he's been busted, and if he wants to continue and get a taste of the new contract, he better remember who's hired him.
We know that Sink r8. That's all you've been saying since this started. You seem to only be getting allies from the MEC admins however.
Then you should be happy with this thread.
That's where you go off the rails Sink. It's a public display of strength...not weakness. Anderson and Campbell might even be slightly concerned right now. I believe tbey've been guaranteed that labor risk is off the table by leaders in the MEC administration, and they're a little PO'd right now.
Carl
The correct analogy is an athlete that has concerns that his agent has been co-opted by the team owners and that agent is no longer negotiating on the athlete's behalf. Said athlete has two choices: 1. Fire the agent and continue negotiations with a new one, or 2. Express doubt publicly about the agent in the hopes said agent knows he's been busted, and if he wants to continue and get a taste of the new contract, he better remember who's hired him.
We know that Sink r8. That's all you've been saying since this started. You seem to only be getting allies from the MEC admins however.
Carl
#5279
Carl
#5280
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
The correct analogy is an athlete that has concerns that his agent has been co-opted by the team owners and that agent is no longer negotiating on the athlete's behalf. Said athlete has two choices: 1. Fire the agent and continue negotiations with a new one, or 2. Express doubt publicly about the agent in the hopes said agent knows he's been busted, and if he wants to continue and get a taste of the new contract, he better remember who's hired him.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




