Airline Pilot Central Forums - Details on Delta TA

The latest from:

C20/DTW

Super Extra Special Update

June 8th, 2015

As we’re certain that you’ve already heard, the MEC held a special meeting May 19-20 at the Hilton Hotel downtown Atlanta to receive a C2015 update from the Negotiating Committee.

A Tentative Agreement (TA) was reached with the company at the end of that meeting and will be briefed, then voted on by the MEC (MEMRAT recommendation) at this week’s special meeting, which begins at 0900 on Tuesday, June 9th at the Renaissance Concourse ATL Hotel. It is expected to be a 2-day meeting with the MEC vote on Wednesday, June 10th, and although the plan has seen a couple of iterations, the info we’ve received today is that the TA briefing and certainly the MEC vote, will be in open session.

The MEC has had the actual language of the TA since last Thursday afternoon, but has been familiar with many of the individual items for some time (except the pay / “value” section which we were initially updated on last week).

The DAL MEC Policy Manual requires a seven day MEC review prior to voting to recommend a RLA (Railway Labor Act) Section 6 TA for Membership Ratification (MEMRAT). There was no MEC effort to reduce that time period.

We understand that many of you want to know the TA details. The intent of this week being set aside for MEC review is to allow the MEC the time to understand the actual language as well as try to assure that the generalities of the individual items we’ve discussed over the past four plus months are reflected in the details. Thanks for your patience with our lack of responses to many calls, emails, and texts; while we are trying, it just hasn’t been possible to respond to all of the queries we’ve received.

The TA train has left the station and we are trying our best to help avert a wreck by attempting to dissect the TA’s parameters. As we’ve said previously, we’ve worked very hard to help craft a TA we could support, however we are certainly prepared and willing to continue the negotiating process should that become necessary.

The relevant section of the Delta MEC Policy Manual on Tentative Agreements is as follows:

Section 9.B. Ratification of Agreements
1. MEC Ratification Policy
a. Collective bargaining agreements that have been approved by the MEC and result from negotiations undertaken pursuant to both Section 28 of the PWA and Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act that both resolve all Section 6 issues and conclude Section 6 negotiations shall be subject to membership ratification. All other agreements shall be subject only to MEC ratification unless the MEC determines that an agreement should be subject to membership ratification.

2. Ratification Procedures
a. A draft copy of all tentative agreements, amendments, and side letters of agreement to the PWA will be distributed to the MEC so that it is in their possession at least seven days prior to a scheduled MEC ratification vote. The seven-day period may be reduced by a majority vote of the MEC.
1) If the National Mediation Board has released the parties pursuant to Section 5 First of the Railway Labor Act, the timing and form of the information provided to the MEC prior to its consideration will be determined by the MEC.
b. No agreement will be submitted to the membership for ratification unless it has first been approved by the MEC.
c. When an agreement is to be submitted for membership ratification, following MEC approval and prior to the opening of membership balloting, the complete and final language will be provided to the members for a period of time as determined by the MEC as appropriate under the existing circumstances. Lacking exigent circumstances, the MEC will use the following time periods as a guideline:
1) For amendments to the agreement: 30 days.
2) For agreements following comprehensive contract negotiations or Section 6 negotiations: 60 days.

Should the MEC approve the TA, it will then pass to the membership for ratification. As we are not facing bankruptcy or imminent doom from an approaching meteor, we are currently unaware of any “exigent circumstances” requiring an expedited ratification process.
If the MEC approves the TA, that becomes the “official position” of the MEC and all MEC communications will proceed from the standpoint that the MEC encourages membership ratification. However, should any individual reps or LECs choose to vote against the TA, they still have the right to explain their vote(s) and perspectives about the individual details as well as the overall TA. Contrary to what some may believe (and that has been said in the past and that you are likely to hear again), these actions are not synonymous with campaigning against the TA.
If the MEC chooses not to recommend the TA, or if the Membership rejects the TA during ratification, we will return to the negotiating phase. We have slightly less than seven months to the amendable date of the current PWA, and considering the expedited course of negotiations up to this point, we may not find this new timetable particularly onerous. Mediation wouldn’t begin any sooner than three months past the amendable date.

Special MEC Meeting – Atlanta, GA June 9-10, 2015
Members in good standing are encouraged to attend the special meeting. Since this was a full Section 6 negotiation with changes to multiple areas of the PWA, the meeting will likely be time compressed since there is a significant amount of material to cover.

The meeting location is:
Renaissance Concourse Atlanta Airport Hotel
One Hartsfield Centre Parkway
Atlanta, GA 30354
(404) 209-9999

Travel from Airport to Hotel:
Taxi - From airport, cost is approximately $8.00 to hotel

Airport Shuttle Service – Scheduled, complimentary by hotel 404-209-9999

The hotel is within walking distance from the training hotels for those currently in training.

Rumor Control
We understand the anxiety surrounding negotiations and the subsequent TA. It is natural to be wondering what is going on and to be concerned about some of the rumors. As we have mentioned in previous updates, it’s a good idea to not become invested in rumors, nor engage in negotiations with one’s self.

While there is no definition of “MEC Confidential”, the MEC Administration has asked us to keep the details of the TA non-public until the meeting (a practice we have previously sought to change, attempting to allow more information disseminated to the membership). In order to prevent that issue from becoming a “sideshow” distraction, we are not addressing any of the details (or rumors) here, nor in other council communications, until after the Tuesday briefing.

We will be able to provide more information, including our (the C20 Reps) positions and perspectives, after the TA has been briefed in open session.

Communications; “Truths”, and “Facts”
“Paging Senator McCarthy, Mr. StrawMan and his friends are here to see you”
(AKA True Headings 15-06: Respecting the Process)

Whatever the final TA result ends up being, there will be different perspectives, attitudes and convictions about the “correct” choice; what the “facts” are and what the “truth” is. Some will be based upon projections or guesses about what the future holds and what will happen next in the process. Others will be based upon numerical data that can be “proven” to tell opposing or at least vastly different stories, sometimes using very creative, even ingenious, mathematical jujitsu. These same disconnects occurred in C2012 and were recently referred to in True Headings 15-06:
“Politics and process are two distinctly different entities. It is one thing to be on the minority side of a vote, and another to accuse the union of violating the process. This accusation was made in 2012, though the accuser did not cite the specific parts of governance that were violated, and our failure to thoroughly repudiate the false claim allowed a festering division to unnecessarily form in our ranks. The insinuation that our process has not been respected in this cycle of collective bargaining has recently appeared in the same local council communications from which it originated last time and was repeated today by another council in their communications….”

Certainly we expect and can accept criticism for things that we write. It is unfortunate though that the MEC Leadership has chosen to use True Headings, which was originally designed as a vehicle to advocate against alternate representation, to be used against LECs whose communications and perspectives don’t “fall in line”.
The MEC Leadership’s author(s) here are intending to impugn the credibility of both the former C20 Officers and Chairman as well as the current ones and those from another Council.
We’ve already addressed the “process issues” perspectives for C2015 in our previous two updates, pointing out that “process” is an undefined term rather than some technical application of the limited negotiations procedures and governance as outlined in the Delta MEC Policy Manual (and in other ALPA governing documents) about which the True Headings refers. Frankly we can’t be more specific about many of our concerns due to the seemingly omnipresent “cloak of confidentiality”.
It is worth noting that the areas of concern relative to both sets of negotiations (C2012 & C2015) are different.
The perspectives, issues & circumstances that were addressed publicly by the former C20 CH & reps about C2012 are supported by several others involved during those negotiations. The TH statement from above that these C2012 perspectives were “false claim[s]”, among other points, are either due to a misinformed author who is overly susceptible to the prevailing jingoism and dogma, or one with a completely divergent conviction and belief structure. Capt. Tom Tucker, former C20CH, has a prepared response to these (continuing) allegations and we are certainly willing to forward it to anyone who is interested.

Also included in the True Headings 15-06:

“At times, individual representatives disagree with the consensus, and at times their different perspectives spill into their communications to the line pilots. It is often the natural result of frustration with the issues surrounding any group effort, and a minority effort to influence the majority.”

Our jobs as reps are not to fall in line with the majority just because we’re in the minority; it’s to pursue what we believe the better solution is, and if unsuccessful, recognizing the decision of the majority, do our best to explain that rationale and perspective, while still explaining to the membership why we made a different decision.
“A minority effort to influence the majority” is itself is a premature and presumptuous statement, since both in 2012 at this similar point and now, a MEMRAT vote to determine “the majority” was not / is not yet known.
So, the point in discussing this is that apparently we can expect more of the same ostracizing treatment for those who have different perspectives throughout the remainder of this process, using words like “truth” and “fact” to represent the MEC Leadership’s (and maybe the MEC majority’s) perspective and opinions and words like “falsehood” and “festering division” for those that differ.

If the TA is approved this Wednesday for membership ratification, please take the time to read all updates for current information and plan on attending our next Council 20 meeting Monday, June 29th at the Westin. Additionally we encourage you to read other Councils' information in order to form a well-rounded opinion prior to casting your vote. As always, please so do not hesitate to call, email or text with your questions or concerns. We will also be available in the lounge June 11th, 12th, and 25th - 29th.

More info on Tuesday. Stay tuned.

Fraternally,

Bill, Rich, and Tom