Details on Delta TA
#881
Very well. Here was your question:
I believe the NMB would release us to a 30 day cooling off period when they saw our negotiations were at an impasse. It's a rhetorical question anyway because DALPA has no plans whatsoever to put any labor risk on the table. 100% guaranteed.
Now, why don't you say what you really mean? What you really mean is that ALPA's consistent talking point is that we can't confront management on anything because the NMB will park us for eternity.
Carl
Now, why don't you say what you really mean? What you really mean is that ALPA's consistent talking point is that we can't confront management on anything because the NMB will park us for eternity.
Carl
#882
No he doesn't. He has nothing to add, so he resorts to name calling and conspiracy theories. Frankly, I don't care whether Alan is an insider or not. Maybe you believe it better if all the "insiders" just clam up so you and purple and Carl can overrun the conversation. I don't know. If you want to discuss the issues, fine and I am willing to do that but when his childish ramblings are interjected they add nothing. You just like what he says because he's on "your side." I don't like what he says, because frankly it's juvenile the majority of the time which is why I have had him on ignore since before the wonderful banishment period that ended all too soon.
And, yeah, I have no problem with the insiders posting here. I WANT them to post. A lot. In a sick sort of way, it's kinda fun (and sad at the same time) watching them squirm as they try to justify a lower value for our profession.
#883
Why can't we all just debate the issues without resorting to, well whatever is it that some folks seem to need to resort to...
Last edited by Alan Shore; 08-24-2014 at 04:22 PM.
#884
The MEC negotiating committee could deal with the opening position. It was when the MEC didn't let the committee do its job that things fell apart. The end result could have achieved sooner, with all 15 jets delivered, had the committee been free to operate on its own. Everyone learned a lesson.
If this was the "lesson" everyone learned from C2K, that sure explains the bad actions by the NC in C2012.
Carl
#885
You have repeatedly held up this pamphlet as a proxy for the value of their contract, yet we now know that, due to their staffing changes, there is less overtime available today. Yet, their contract itself has not changed.
My point then, is simply that the MIT Form 41 data has neither less nor more validity and context than the SWAPA infomercial.
But as I said before, in 2012 the "SWAPA infomercial" data WAS relevant. It was a data point showing arguably our biggest domestic competitor at the time with pilots making substantially more than our pilot doing the same type of flying. It was a data point that could have been used to help bolster our argument that our pay no longer needs to be based on bankruptcy and needed to be boosted significantly (a heck of a lot more than 4833). DALPA refused to use this. In fact, they not only refused to use it, they tried to sweep it under the rug.
#886
But as I said before, in 2012 the "SWAPA infomercial" data WAS relevant. It was a data point showing arguably our biggest domestic competitor at the time with pilots making substantially more than our pilot doing the same type of flying. It was a data point that could have been used to help bolster our argument that our pay no longer needs to be based on bankruptcy and needed to be boosted significantly (a heck of a lot more than 4833). DALPA refused to use this. In fact, they not only refused to use it, they tried to sweep it under the rug.
#887
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,399
There is no doubt that I am a greasy line schlub who demands accountability, transparency, and performance from "my" "union." That is my agenda.
Why are you and Alan Shore (and shiznit, herkflyr, sailingfun, et al) so clearly opposed to disclosing your (insultingly obvious) agendas?
Do you want less money and time off than we rate? Or are you a management type who makes good money no matter what contract we negotiate?
We want what you want. We may disagree with the tactics, but that doesn't mean we disagree on the end result. I'm not sure why you ever think otherwise.
#888
I didn't see him as demeaning your talk. What he was clearly saying is that he didn't believe your talk. I agree in that I think you talk a little tough occasionally to have a little "street cred" and not come off as a 100% DALPA apologist. But in the end, you always come around to the 100% alignment with DALPA. That's what he meant when he said this:
Now you on the other hand stooped to the standard DALPA tactic of disqualifying someone's opinion because you made the (wrong in DAL88's case) assumption that he'd never done any work in DALPA...and only talk:
That was very alfaromeo of you. It's not flattering.
Carl
That was very alfaromeo of you. It's not flattering.
Carl
#889
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
You're comparing our current contract (when the company is wildly profitable) to our contract "a few years ago" (when the company was bankrupt).
Now there's something we can hang our hats on.
The company is more profitable than ever before.
Why are you unable to commit to demanding that we make more money and have more time off than ever before?
If we can't do it now...when can we?
Last edited by Purple Drank; 08-24-2014 at 04:55 PM.
#890
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post