Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Details on Delta TA (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/88532-details-delta-ta.html)

Carl Spackler 06-15-2015 03:26 PM


Originally Posted by MtEverest (Post 1906003)
Has anybody heard from Council 1 or 20? Will they provide a proper pro/con paper in the tradition of ALPA that was once trusted with facts?

Haven't spoken to either councils about this, but I can tell you that there was serious discussion during C2012 at the MEC administration level of putting Council 20 (DTW) under receivership via Article 8 of the ALPA constitution. That would have meant the elected leadership removed and ALPA national running the council. That's how angry that MEC administration was at council 20 for producing con papers and dissenting views. That could very well be happening again. If so, I hope those councils speak up anyway.

Carl

MtEverest 06-15-2015 03:32 PM


Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1906045)
I think it was slowplay that thought it. Funny though.

Carl

OK, get those two S's confused.

MtEverest 06-15-2015 03:40 PM


Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1906051)
Haven't spoken to either councils about this, but I can tell you that there was serious discussion during C2012 at the MEC administration level of putting Council 20 (DTW) under receivership via Article 8 of the ALPA constitution. That would have meant the elected leadership removed and ALPA national running the council. That's how angry that MEC administration was at council 20 for producing con papers and dissenting views. That could very well be happening again. If so, I hope those councils speak up anyway.

Carl

That's really sad if that happened and is happening. It just further indicts this current MEC as being dishonest. If what they are selling is accurate, it can stand up to a proper pro/con. I used to be a strong supporter of our union. The way they are acting now is outrageous and more like a dictatorship than a union representing the people.

BenderRodriguez 06-15-2015 03:41 PM


Originally Posted by Trip7 (Post 1905908)
And we'll be back to the table in 2018, 2 years before AA's CURRENT deal expires

I'm not sure that is much of a selling point frankly. It means we will, once again, be pattern bargaining off of ourselves. I don't expect any help from SWA. FDX is a darkhorse, and UAL is um. Yeah.

Carl Spackler 06-15-2015 03:50 PM


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
I am a yes but what happens when the company cant afford these 20% raises? Now what?

Easy, we help our company if there is true need. We've always done that. The mistake we made was not demanding snap-back provisions in bankruptcy. Our unions did not even ask for that because it was ALPA national's position that snap-back clauses word harm the airline if they became profitable again. Not kidding. Can you imagine the angst this would saved this pilot group once the industry got a hand on how to be profitable?


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
Profit sharing wont matter cause will headed towards BK.

That's what makes profit sharing so important. During bad times, the company doesn't pay it. During good times, we don't have to negotiate for it.


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
I actually like the sick call procedures, keeps people honest,

I'm honest too, but I've had some bad health luck in my career. During that bad luck, I've never had to turn over my privacy rights. Now I will...if I want to be paid that is.


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
and dont mind the LCA. Why should anybody be payed to sit at home. Pretty sure nobody gets paid to sit on their a$$ at HQ's.

As others have said, HQ jobs aren't comparable. Pretty sure HQ guys don't work weekends, holidays and miss much of their children's growing up.


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
I am proudly voting yes but with reservations.

OK.

Carl

Carl Spackler 06-15-2015 03:53 PM


Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1906020)
Convenient that you omitted the first part of my post.

That's because I didn't think that part of your post was total BS. The rest was.

Carl

Purple Drank 06-15-2015 03:56 PM


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
. I actually like the sick call procedures, keeps people honest, and dont mind the LCA. Why should anybody be payed to sit at home. Pretty sure nobody gets paid to sit on their a$$ at HQ's. I am proudly voting yes but with reservations.


Purple Drank 06-15-2015 03:57 PM


Originally Posted by ERflyer (Post 1906009)

Like I said, I am currently undecided on this one however.

First, the money.

Money is not "first" for everyone.

Carl Spackler 06-15-2015 03:57 PM


Originally Posted by SayAlt (Post 1906043)
Carl should be recruited to replace Donutbelly. Unfortunately, Carl is too smart and honest to ever take the job. :(

Appreciate the kind words, I just think we have much smarter people here that would do a great job. But first we'd have to get rid of the antiquated process of electing an MEC chairman. It should be a vote of the full membership.

Carl

80ktsClamp 06-15-2015 03:59 PM


Originally Posted by Instructordude (Post 1906008)
I am a yes but what happens when the company cant afford these 20% raises? Now what? Profit sharing wont matter cause will headed towards BK. I actually like the sick call procedures, keeps people honest, and dont mind the LCA. Why should anybody be payed to sit at home. Pretty sure nobody gets paid to sit on their a$$ at HQ's. I am proudly voting yes but with reservations.

You do realize that the LCA thing cuts into those raises as your earning potential will be less due to less GS and WS due to increased rsvs? If you're right seat, that will directly affect the trip quality you can hold as well.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands