Details on Delta TA
06-17-2015 | 07:45 AM
#9511
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Not exactly how it's written in the TA.
1) The medical release window could be anytime the DHS is unable to make a determination based on the information you've provided. Even if you haven't met the threshold. That's subjective, and totally up to them.
2) The release can then be expanded, again totally subjective and solely at the DHS discretion, to include an exam by a company picked doctor, and the Vice President of Flight Operations. No doctor will take the time to redact impertinent health information from the results of the written release. That includes social history, medications, health issues, and as soon as the FAA releases the new regs, your mental health records. Good luck getting any of that redacted.
Again, "or his designee" could be anyone. It most certainly could be a third party. I'm sorry, but "The company told us" is not a contractual obligation.
Most major corporations, S&P500 we're talking, use third party verification. Time Warner, AT&T, and so on. We are already using it for a large portion of our own employees. What in this TA prevents that from happening? The answer: Nothing. We agree to allow an unspecified 'designee' to evaluate our health and our sick leave usage.
1) The medical release window could be anytime the DHS is unable to make a determination based on the information you've provided. Even if you haven't met the threshold. That's subjective, and totally up to them.
2) The release can then be expanded, again totally subjective and solely at the DHS discretion, to include an exam by a company picked doctor, and the Vice President of Flight Operations. No doctor will take the time to redact impertinent health information from the results of the written release. That includes social history, medications, health issues, and as soon as the FAA releases the new regs, your mental health records. Good luck getting any of that redacted.
Again, "or his designee" could be anyone. It most certainly could be a third party. I'm sorry, but "The company told us" is not a contractual obligation.
Most major corporations, S&P500 we're talking, use third party verification. Time Warner, AT&T, and so on. We are already using it for a large portion of our own employees. What in this TA prevents that from happening? The answer: Nothing. We agree to allow an unspecified 'designee' to evaluate our health and our sick leave usage.
I do understand your concerns and I think they are valid, however I am telling you everything as both the Union and the company are translating this agreement.
06-17-2015 | 07:45 AM
#9512
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Industry Leading
Not to mention that our pay raise is being funded by the other employees losing almost half their profit sharing (in the credit suisse sense that this contract not costing the company anything). I keep telling the F/A's in the van that our pay raise will be funded by their losing a bunch of profit sharing and to ask other pilots about it and how they are voting. It is starting to pop up on their forums. Someone on the forum (the company?) is saying, 'Don't listen to what the pilots say.'
06-17-2015 | 07:47 AM
#9513
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Not to mention that our pay raise is being funded by the other employees losing almost half their profit sharing (in the credit suisse sense that this contract not costing the company anything). I keep telling the F/A's in the van that our pay raise will be funded by their losing a bunch of profit sharing and to ask other pilots about it and how they are voting. It is starting to pop up on their forums. Someone on the forum (the company?) is saying, 'Don't listen to what the pilots say.'
I think it is very valid and something that should be factored into everyone's vote.
06-17-2015 | 07:54 AM
#9514
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
From: Stay THIRSTY, my friends!
Ask the negotiators and contract admin please. I can't work on specific language I have nothing to do with or can effect. I hope you understand.
I do understand your concerns and I think they are valid, however I am telling you everything as both the Union and the company are translating this agreement.
I do understand your concerns and I think they are valid, however I am telling you everything as both the Union and the company are translating this agreement.
06-17-2015 | 08:06 AM
#9515
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
From: A330 First Officer
Each Friday the FA's have a memo labeled rumor has it. It almost always has a question regarding pilots. Someone needs to get an FA buddy to send in a question asking point blank if the pilot TA will change the profit sharing for the FA group. If they say yes then the cat is out of the bag, if they say no then I don't think we should be compelled to give ours up.
06-17-2015 | 08:06 AM
#9516
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Likes: 0
06-17-2015 | 08:08 AM
#9517
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Again, my scope of influence is not Universal and omniscient.
My apologies but I do not know. And if someone tells you they know they probably do not. Contract admin and NC will have those answers on road shows.
06-17-2015 | 08:09 AM
#9518
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 106
From: Road construction signholder
You know, in the big picture, if this is the best we can do ( the contract cost to the company is, well, we save the company 100 million ) during a time of record profits, then voting "yes" is a vote for the end of this career as one worth pursuing. Because we are restoring nothing to the quality of life parts of the contract, are actually installing bankruptcy era concessions (UAL got the LCA 75% deal during their bankruptcy) and are still well-below inflation adjusted pay rates. Wait until the next economic crisis to see how fast and far our 'contract' will fall if this is all the spine we can muster now.
Not a career worth pursuing?
I'm still voting against it and hope it is shot down. Too many bad, unnecessary provisions.
But it is still a career worth pursuing.
We also look at the past with rose colored glasses but it wasn't all wonderful all the time then either.
06-17-2015 | 08:41 AM
#9519
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
From: 320A
I don't think you even need 15 days sick.Say you call in sick for a 1 day trip-now you have 13 days off/vacation.15th day you call in sick because maybe a different family member sick-now you have your 15 days for them to wack you when you only used 2 sick days.
06-17-2015 | 08:47 AM
#9520
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
What is Delta Health Services?
Is it a part of Delta Air Lines like:
1. Delta Ground Services (DGS)
2. Delta Connection Inc. (DCI)
If DHS is like DGS or DCI, it's not really the Delta Air Lines we work for; just a spin off that shares the name Delta. These faux Delta outfits were started as a money saving venture. The employees are paid less than what an "RD" would be paid to perform like work. (RJ co-pilots at Delta Connection carriers make less than Delta FA's)
Adding the "Delta" prefix doesn't give me a high level of comfort WRT the quality of the outfit.
I think if we are being asked to submit to a higher level of scrutiny, it's not too much to ask that the individuals we deal with work for the "exact" same company, not a faux Delta. If I have to go through this obstacle course, I want to speak with Tom or Debbie who work for Delta Air Lines, dept. 123 (PILOT healthcare) at Fort Widget in the ATL vice Bob from Bombay who is with Delta Health Services.
Saying our verification will not be done with a "third party" because it has the name "Delta" at the front leaves too much wiggle room.
Last edited by Army80; 06-17-2015 at 09:00 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
