In an effort to answer these questions as we get closer to road shows please send specific questions t: [email protected]

The experts in the contract language will be answering these and they will be posted on the DALMEC Facebook page.

Thank you all for engaging and educating yourselves. Whether you are a yes or no voter, you deserve to have all the information possible to make that decision.

 

Make sure the "answers" you get from the MEC "experts" are the actual TA language as opposed to their opinions of what the language really means. That's where the falsehoods come in.

Carl

 

[QUOTE=HBdude;1904726]Exactly. This is classic FUD. How about option 6:

6. doing nothing and sitting on current book is better than the massive concessions the TA contains.

As for the NMB, it is entirely unreasonable to demand any concessions in this kind of environment where we make almost twice the profit per quarter that we did per year (other airlines too) when pay and work rules were significantly higher.

Wind the watch and tell the NMB that while we certainly deserve C2K + full inflation, 7 weeks of touch drop vacation and the return of the FAE A fund, all we want are minor COLA+ raises, enough to return C2K plus only half of inflation because we want to help the company out by recognising the sancity of their bankruptcy reset, even though it isn't needed, and a couple percent more DC, all of the zero cost scope improvements (SEA is a HUB and a few dozen large RJ's sunset) and a few work rule improvements.

Meanwhile let the company flail around and pound their desks about how much they "need" numerous and deep concessions. Then we compromise yet again, to be extra reasonable. We tell the NMB that the TA's supposed value, all things considered, was 1.1B according to the company, and they'd never lie. So we'll gladly help return 100M to the shareholders, executive leaders or the charity of the company's choice by only taking 1.0B in added value in pay/DC/per diem/vaca only with no other changes aside from the zero cost item of SEA being a hub. Sounds pretty reasonable, doesn't it?

 

Agreed. Completely Carl.

If anyone TELLS you to vote yes. Ignore them.
If anyone TELLS you to vote no. Ignore them.

Educate yourself on the TA and vote.

Thanks Carl.

 

Behind 50 pages in reading. Sorry if this has been already posted.

From a UAL guy and worth reading.
As a UA guy I can tell you that everybody over hear I have talked to cares.
We already have two of the big reasons you should vote NO on this TA in our contract. Both of which we desperately want to get rid of in our next one!!! If you guys can't hold the line, then we are screwed.
We have the 75% of OE need can be blocked from FO bidding and as a 747 FO it absolutely sucks. Choice Flying trips are blocked every month, leaving less flying trips for senior folks to bid on. So, more senior folks are forced into Bunkie (IRO) slots. Increasing the likelyhood that you will get to go back to the training center for landings, YIPEEEEEEEE!!!! Also build less lines, so you need less FOs, forcing folks on to reserve that should hold a line and denying bids to the next folks in line that want to upgrade. That of course cascades down the rest of the seniority list and like the preverbial snowball going down a hill gains size as it goes, you end up with folks on the outside that can't get in. It is a huge give to the company!!!!
The other part that we already have is the relaxed counting for JV/Scope. If you want to know how bad it is, the best example I can give is the LAX to Germany routes. We used to fly a 777 from LAX to FRA, but we don't anymore. Bad route you say, I laugh in your general direction, it is a great route!!!, just ask Lufthansa. They are currently flying an A380 from LAX-FRA, a 747-800 from LAX-FRA and an A340 from LAX-MUC. Thanks to our brilliant JV/Scope that is perfectly legal even though we don't get any metal on the route. A 757-200 counts the same as an A380!!!! You have got to be kidding me!!!!!!
Again, these are two of the sections that we swallowed a horse pill over in our last agreement because we didn't have a joint contract and needed to get one to move our group along as one. Our last agreement was a hold your nose and vote yes, because it wasn't really voting yes on a contract as much as it was voting yes to end the separation of the two pilot groups! There is no way our current contract would pass on its own merits and I think you would hear that pretty consistently from the UA group. The gives that you have in your TA are very painful, anyone who tries to tell you differently is a either a Bold Faced Liar or completely ignorant. Those are the only two choices.
If you vote yes on this and are in the bottom 3/4 of the seniority list, I think you will see that, despite the pay raises, your W-2 earnings will actually be lower than they would have been once the widebody growth stagnation is fully realized! Pay raises with no growth on the top end are worse than no pay raises but real Widebody growth!
We had a huge number of outside compelling reasons to vote for a less than ideal contract 3 years ago. Those are gone for us and I don't see anyway that we would vote for your TA and I don't see any reason that you should either!

 

Just sent this to the Council 44 Chair:

To say I am severely disappointed that this TA is being passed to the membership would be a gross understatement. A concessionary contract during the most profitable times in the history of Delta Air Lines is not what I, nor any pilot I have spoken with, asked for in our surveys/communications with our reps.

Further, the recent communication from the Council 66 Chair confirms what I already knew… that the membership direction was not followed.

Since you and the rest of LEC 44, as well as the MEC Chair and the NC, are clearly not pursuing the direction of your constituents, I intend on asking for a recall of all parties as soon as possible.

If you or any cc’d member could assist me in the details of this procedure, I would greatly appreciate it.

If the membership is to defeat this gross miscalculation, time is of the essence.

Thank you.

 

As a new hire probie, will I be able to attend the road show?

 

Recalling the C44 reps is going to be key to this. That cannot happen fast enough.

Carl

 

Management is puking for a deal. Plan B is to get a fair agreement. IMO we will get a new deal immediately.

And if I'm wrong, we sit tight with none of these severe concessions and ever increasing profit sharing.

Our execs don't want us to see Q2 earnings at American. With the billions in hedging losses our profits will match theirs going forward.

 

Yes of course. You can't vote yet but you can still attend.