Details on Delta TA
08-23-2014, 05:55 PM
#791
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by 76drvr
Section 3.b.6 of the Delta PWA allowed the company to operate a new aircraft while we negotiated pay rates for it. The underlined section which I have highlighted allowed the pilots to park the fleet if after 6 months we had not come to an agreement on rates of pay. The company had to agree to our 777 pay rates or the 777 fleet would be parked. This provided the leverage to set the record reates of pay on the 777 and created the Delta "dot", which UALPA used to pattern off of.
That's what I just can't fathom today. How the hell did we get here.
Carl
08-23-2014, 05:59 PM
#793
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by sailingfun
We originally opened for something way beyond 265 dollars an hour. The negotiating committee did not even like the opener and after the fact stated several times we could have had a agreement early on at a higher rate had we not opened around 400 an hour.
Oh the humanity.
Carl
08-23-2014, 06:00 PM
#794
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Originally Posted by 76drvr
those 11.000 controllers made up nearly 100% of the controllers in the country. There are roughly 80,000 commercial airline pilots of which we make up about 15% of the workforce and serve about 25% of the capacity. Rough numbers but in the ballpark.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be disruptive, but it wouldn't be Armegedon either.
So your plan is an illegal job action, which has failed miserably in the past, got it. You going to run for office and bring us all restoration with your plan?
I'm not saying it wouldn't be disruptive, but it wouldn't be Armegedon either.
So your plan is an illegal job action, which has failed miserably in the past, got it. You going to run for office and bring us all restoration with your plan?
Further Appeasement?
4-8-3-3 ain't going to get us there in my lifetime.
Go read Flying the Line, vol. I and II.
How do you think our pay rates got to where they were in the first place?
Hint; Appeasement wasn't in their vocabulary.
08-23-2014, 06:04 PM
#795
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by RetiredFTS
I know the pros/cons of publishing contract survey results has been beaten repeatedly the last 2 years, but how about publishing the company's openers? What did they come to the table expecting. It would give us a measure of the effectiveness of our NC. I certainly would like to see both results and openers after C2015. Holding my breath.
Carl
08-23-2014, 06:10 PM
#796
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by 76drvr
How'd that illegal job action work for PATCO?
If we demanded a contract that led the industry in every measure, and the NMB threatened to not release us, it could be argued that it would be the NMB that was violating the law by misusing their charter to remove the legal right to strike.
The PATCO comparison is absolutely apples and oranges.
Carl
08-23-2014, 06:13 PM
#797
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by gzsg
I oppose any concessions, but that is not the will of the MEC unless it changes. Perhaps we will get some LAX reps that are not on board in the upcoming election.
Carl
08-23-2014, 06:23 PM
#798
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 938
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
PATCO were government employees, and as such, their contract contained a no-strike clause. Our contract does not.
If we demanded a contract that led the industry in every measure, and the NMB threatened to not release us, it could be argued that it would be the NMB that was violating the law by misusing their charter to remove the legal right to strike.
The PATCO comparison is absolutely apples and oranges.
Carl
If we demanded a contract that led the industry in every measure, and the NMB threatened to not release us, it could be argued that it would be the NMB that was violating the law by misusing their charter to remove the legal right to strike.
The PATCO comparison is absolutely apples and oranges.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
