|
When is the vote supposed to take place? AM i right that the PS doesn't change till 2017? Gives the company 2 years to break it to the rest of the employees.
I am pleasantly surprised the TA points were sent out before the vote, that didn't happen in 2012 did it? |
Originally Posted by PilotFrog
(Post 1899896)
When is the vote supposed to take place? AM i right that the PS doesn't change till 2017? Gives the company 2 years to break it to the rest of the employees.
I am pleasantly surprised the TA points were sent out before the vote, that didn't happen in 2012 did it? Denny |
I am not a DPA member, however an announcement that they have enough cards would be ridiculously well timed to spur both the MEC and the company.
|
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1899890)
As I said the details seems to explain it at the time, but there was so much info covered rapid fire that I honestly don't remember. I've been trying to get some clarification, so I'm not read to pull the panic cord....yet :p
On another note, I didn't realize the company was still out of JV compliance. If we do not come to a deal by next spring and they are still out of compliance, would that be a violation of the "status quo" of negotiations and could we possibly get an injunction to force them to comply? Just spitballin' here... Denny |
Stages of TA Acceptance
Lets hope the DAL Pilot Group does better than Homer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0D6_msdM8rU Scoop - Voted yes on C2012, voting No this time. |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1899907)
Leine, not to pick on you but in a previous post you used the phrase "that's not so bad" when talking about going from EASK's to BH's. This a contract cycle where we should NOT be hearing or saying phrases like that or "I can live with that" to major sections of our contract.
On another note, I didn't realize the company was still out of JV compliance. If we do not come to a deal by next spring and they are still out of compliance, would that be a violation of the "status quo" of negotiations and could we possibly get an injunction to force them to comply? Just spitballin' here... Denny I doubt it - The "Status-Quo" is non-compliance. Scoop :D |
Ferd is 100% right. Guys like us ARE the swing voters and you can bet your arse that I will be discussing this TA with anyone I fly with and expressing my displeasure with it. if guys like us are going to vote no, I'll bet it doesn't pass memrat.
Denny |
It was interesting what rumors came true and didn't.. pay banding (well the 350 pays the same as the whale that it's replacing as it should), green slip gone, and a lot of the other stuff didn't make it. Sick leave was in there, and the pay rates with traded PS were pretty dang close.
It was cool seeing all the APC types there today! I went into this with fairly low expectations. They didn't disappoint me in that regard. Ideally, I want to be able to vote yes for an early deal. Likes: --Pay is... ok. It's another base hit, nothing more, and I don't mind the logic in trading profit sharing. (It's an airline, for petes sake... we're in the business of not making profit) --Scope improvements- further locking in more mainline flying (despite allowing up to 25 more 76 seaters), tightened JV compliance window, and I agree with keeping VA out of the trans-atlantic metric, Republic carveout gone --Individual vacation days --Improved fragmentation language --Hotels for newhires Meh: --Sick leave.... nothing good, nothing really worse than we have now. Dislikes: --TATL JV metric changed from equivalent seat kms to pilot block hours. That is a BIG deal- that means AF can add A380s on routes and that is considered the same as a 757 (or A321 in the future). With ESKs if they dropped an A380 onto a route, that was 2 767s that we had to add. The illustrious Bucking Bar tried to explain how this wasn't a bad thing, but it never hit home with me. --Seattle STILL not a hub.... --TLV (transitive line value) max adjusted from 80 hours to 81 hours. Bye bye 100+ pilot jobs with that one. --And this one may be the deal breaker for me: LCA trip buyoffs for OE. Up to 75% of trips that LCAs bid for will be pulled out of the FO's pot for bidding. That is a complete abrogation of seniority and totally screws up any FO bids of any seniority. Take out the LCA thing and I'm probably a yes vote... I'm really having a hard time getting over that, though. That to me is something it may be worth it to send it back through the spin cycle another time. Oh, and SharpestTool is taking a few days of vacation to see if he can play more nicely. If not, he can go the way of Lumberg. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1899917)
Likes:
...--Scope improvements- further locking in more mainline flying (despite allowing up to 25 more 76 seaters), tightened JV compliance window, and I agree with keeping VA out of the trans-atlantic metric, Republic carveout gone It's a concession. |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1899907)
Leine, not to pick on you but in a previous post you used the phrase "that's not so bad" when talking about going from EASK's to BH's. This a contract cycle where we should NOT be hearing or saying phrases like that or "I can live with that" to major sections of our contract.
On another note, I didn't realize the company was still out of JV compliance. If we do not come to a deal by next spring and they are still out of compliance, would that be a violation of the "status quo" of negotiations and could we possibly get an injunction to force them to comply? Just spitballin' here... Denny Maybe by next spring we will have a union that represents the interests of Delta pilots. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:45 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands