Airline Pilot Central Forums - LAX Based Grassroot Anti TA Movement

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - LAX Based Grassroot Anti TA Movement (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/88655-lax-based-grassroot-anti-ta-movement.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JungleBus (Post 1905366)

Hey Oberon, I thought for sure I had your phone number and was going to give you a call. Guess I don't, so we can do this here. You're a good guy if a bit trusting of ALPA - but then again, so was I a week ago. Here we go...

1. Using EASKs for the production of balance at least guaranteed that roughly 50% of JV passengers went across the pond on Delta metal. As I'm sure you're well aware, that language most recently had 1.5% wiggle room with a 3-year lookback and a 1-year cure, and Delta was never in compliance that entire time (I believe they ended with ~47.5% of the EASKs). Because we operate smaller-gauge equipment than AF/KLM, 50% EASKs amounted to something like 54% of the block hours and even Delta's non-compliant state left us with 51% of the block hours. Now we go to 50% which puts Delta back in compliance with another 1% of wiggle room. Going down to the minimum would take us down to about 46% of the JV passenger traveling on Delta metal - for now. Delta could further downgauge and it would have no effect on block hour ratio; Air France could add an A380 CDG-JFK and Delta could just add a 737-900ER BOS-AMS and it would all be perfectly compliant. Currently, Delta downgauging means they'd have to add more flights to make up for it (or AF/KL/AZ has to draw down capacity); and Air France adding an A380 means we add 2 A330s :) or 3 757s :eek:. Some ALPA-friendly posters here have claimed block hours have more downside protection, using the example that if AF parks a A380, we have to park 2 A330s - but there's nothing in the language that actually requires that, and in any case DL has never been anywhere close to the 50% so it's a moot point.

2. Someone took the ATL 88 wide report from a couple months ago and cross-referenced it to the LCAs. It's improbable that every LCA was giving OE on every trip, but we know they've been busy in that category, and we know they'll stay as busy or busier going forward. It amounted to something like 10.7% of the trips removed....and 90% of the LCA lines had weekends off! Obviously that won't be true in every category, but it's clearly a pretty major concession for junior FOs that take the seniority hit, senior FOs that lose out on GS opportunities, and junior CAs that suddenly find themselves sliding backwards as senior FOs upgrade to make up the lost money!

3. The company needed a few things, which was the only reason we opened early. I believe they will still need those things, and more urgently going forward, but will be unwilling to come back to the table immediately lest we demonstrate the benefits of unionism to the other employees. So we'll forego our 8% raise on 7/1, forego the 6% raise in 2016 but also keep about that much profit sharing we would have given up, keep LCA trips, keep current sick leave, keep current JV balance (and keep grieving it if the company continues to be out of compliance), etc. Eventually the company will come back and up the ante or make the concessions a bit less onerous (there were frankly far better ways to address their issues - we gave them a sledgehammer for issues that required a tackhammer). I don't think they'll park us in negotiations hell the entire time - but if they do, we're not in that bad of a spot to wait, while they kinda are.

Thanks Jungle. I'd like to keep the civil conversation going but unintentionally hijacked this thread so I'm going to move your response to the "Details on Delta TA" thread.

Cheers,
Oberon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1905326)

Nestor was one of those FO reps. He also ran and won on a platform of change and being a scope hawk. I wonder what the ATL FO's think now.

Carl

We would like him recalled on the basis he failed to represent the FOs in ATL.

Gunfighter will you please check your PMs

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1905197)

You're the guy who accused me of being an ALPA insider and a management insider, what does that do for your credibility?

My last post is easily verifiable and, you know, a fact so I'm not sure what my credibility has to do with it anyway.

By the way, I'm an on the fence voter who wants more information (about scope and LCA drops) before making a decision. Shouting down anyone who tries to bring facts to the conversation isn't particularly appealing to me. Maybe I'm alone in my distaste for divisive politics but I doubt it.

A few questions...

1. How does the international scope compare to what we are already doing? What we are projected to do?

2. What percentage of rotations will be removed from the FO bid package?

3. If we send the TA back what will happen? I know what the options are, I want to know what people think will actually happen.

Who cares? Working under C2012 is better than working under this TA!

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1904751)

If you guys want to be successful, tell your e-mail writers to ensure they stay fact based. Example: B737-900 ETOPS to Europe? Please. Also, if changing to block hours is a "land grab", what happens when Alitalia's EASK are pulled out of the JV next year versus what will happen under a block hour regimen? What happens as we add A330-300 to replace 7ER flying under the same premise?

Make sure they're prepared with facts as they grab the torches and pitchforks. JMO.

Fair questions. What are the current seat kilometers that Alitalia is flying? I higly doubt however that the change from 7ERs to 330s is going to amount to that many seats in the aggregate. It would take a bunch of 330s going across the ocean to add up to enough to result in dropping any, and I frankly don't see that as being much of a real threat. Besides, they are out of whack as it is, and the grievance by the way, did nothing to rectify that. My first question is the one that matters and the only one that makes any real difference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jobagodonuts (Post 1904864)

This means it is far more likely that I'll use my 15 days of Unverified Sick Leave under this TA. The result will be that any future minor illness in the subsequent 365 day window, such as a cold, will require me to go to a doctor for Verification.

Worse, there are some conditions that are not really verifiable, or at least not easily verifiable. Lets say you have trouble at home. You are getting a divorce. You have a huge fight with your wife one night, don't get a wink of sleep and are naturally upset and emotionally wrought. And you have to fly the next day but you are in no condition to fly. It would be irresponsible and illegal for you to do so.

Now you have to explain all that somehow to DHS? It's not the same as getting your PCP or a GP to verify that you have the sniffles.

So no, this change in sick rules doesn't just affect the small percentage of abusers. It can hurt all of us.

And imagine what the certificate implications would be if they deem you "mentally unfit."

We don't even know what the FAA's requirements are for reporting stuff like that...but we'd give the company a blank check for turning us in to the FAA.

This TA is poisonous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1905326)

Nestor was one of those FO reps. He also ran and won on a platform of change and being a scope hawk. I wonder what the ATL FO's think now.

Carl

Carl

He was never a threat to challenge or change anything. The MEC had him on puppet strings. The true architects of this TA positioned their loyalists in strategic positions to influence the outcome of this debacle. As someone used to say...connect the dots.

Fantastic read. Great explanations of what is going on. All of us on the outside are closely watching this scenario play out and hoping for a big "NO!" This will set the stage for other airlines approaching (or currently in) negotiations.

LAX Grassroots letter 2 - Getting Involved

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This is the second of what will be many electronic communications in an effort to unite all Delta Pilots against the current TA.
First, let’s be clear on our main goal: the overwhelming defeat of this TA. Some Delta Pilots have stated a desire to recall current LEC Representatives. While it is true that any among us can start a recall movement, it is imperative that for the time being we focus all of our efforts on defeating this TA.
Before we discuss a few things that every DAL Pilot can do to contribute the defeat of the TA let us take a look at our MEC Chairman’s recent Chairman’s Letter for Monday June 15, and one Delta Pilot’s take on it. We will not repost the whole letter but will just cut and paste a recent post (with permission from the poster) from the “Chit Chat” forums.
Referencing Chairman Donatelli’s letter the poster states:
Did he just say:
“We just signed a tentative agreement with Delta Air Lines that is the richest in pilot history, unmatched anywhere in the country or the world, and which gives the Delta pilots substantial raises in pay over the next three years. This is a fact.”
Followed by:
“Here is what I pledge: No sell job. We will print the facts.”
In the same letter?????
Besides the obvious conflict, since when did "substantial" become a verifiable fact? A fact would have been "...which gives the Delta Pilots an average raise of 4.75% a year" 8/.25/3/3 over 3 years averages 4.75. That is a fact. Substantial is subjective, in other words a sales job. He couldn't even finish a single letter promising not to sell.....................without selling.”

Now here are a few things that we can all do to help defeat this TA.

Join the "Delta Pilots Against Contract 2015 TA" Facebook page. Social media is changing how many of us communicate - even the association is trying to use it. In the past, most communication was top down and grassroots movements such as ours were at a serious disadvantage. Social media has turned that convention around and we now have serious tools to make things happen. Let’s use these tools to our advantage and help spread the word about the shortfalls of this TA.
Visit popular pilot forums like Airline Pilot Central (www.airlinepilotforums.com) and the Delta Pilots Hangar (www.thehangar.forumchitchat.com) and contribute your opinions and thoughts on this TA. Please remain respectful of other posters and remember we all have opinions on the issues - we may not agree but we ARE all Delta pilots.
Attend one of the upcoming roadshows. The more prepared we are prior to going, the better we will do. Understanding the TA language, familiarity with our contract history, and prepared questions to ask the speakers will be our tools to help defeat this TA. Keep in mind all of the DALPA speakers have practiced responding to questions and are armed with talking points. We cannot let them distort our questions and reply with canned and/or unrelated answers - we must keep them on-point to ensure they fully answer our questions.
In a movement like this, volunteers in other bases can make a seriously difference. Defeating this TA is our primary goal - it’s all hands on deck, so please reach out if you think you would like to to start a similar campaign in your base.

Remember that EIGHT Delta Pilots on the MEC with all of the inside knowledge and information rejected this TA. Do not let the P2P and DALPA spokesmen convince you that they are privy to insider information that “great things will follow this TA.” We know what this TA says, we know what it will do to our profession, and we know that it falls short. In fact, have a look at the enclosed document. It is a letter from the Council 108 (CVG) Vice Chairman to his constituents, indicting his perspective and reasons for voting no on the TA when it was brought before the MEC. We should share this with everyone we see - it is a great perspective from an elected representative.

Thank you all for your time, your engagement, and your support. Expect to see another letter soon, addressing the “fear factor” that the association is using to attempt to scare voters into voting for the TA.

CORRECTION: In a previous email, it was stated that the TA changes the “sick year” from June 1 - May 31 to a rolling 365-day window. This is not correct - the TA does not change the “sick year”. However, the TA will establish a 365-day rolling window to look at sick leave usage as a trigger for the requirement of a Verification Certificate from a Qualified Health Care Professional (QHCP).

If you are interested in joining this movement here is the contact information:

Steve Goode
LAX 73N B
[email protected]