C1 update
#1
July 14, 2015
Fellow Council 1 Pilots,
By now, many of you have heard that on Friday, July 10, 2015, the membership rejected the TA. The tentative agreement had an overwhelming participation rate:
97% (approx. 10,713 pilots) voted
65% (approx. 6,947 pilots) voted against ratifying the tentative agreement
35% (approx. 3,766 pilots) voted for ratifying the tentative agreement
We have a new-found level of respect and gratitude for what our pilots in Council 1 and what the entire DAL pilot group dealt with as you were left with a very difficult decision. By a large margin, 65% of pilots clearly rejected the company’s proposals and the resulting TA. Why? After meeting with many pilots in the past month, we were informed that the TA simply was not the contract you expected with all the past sacrifices the group endured, especially while we are in the best economic environment we have ever seen. Our pilots truly believe we to are stakeholders in Delta, and want what’s best for employees, the company, and our passengers.
Moving forward In a past update, we acknowledged the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA. You made the decision! It is time for the MEC to roll up their sleeves and accept the fact that 65% of the pilots, a significant number, expect to be treated like professionals and do not want to be talked down to, told what is best for them, and the survey ignored. More importantly, we have heard the following concerns from our pilots:
How do we move forward with the same leadership and negotiating team that seemed to feel that this was the best they could achieve?
Those who listened to the pilots are still in the minority; will this just create more angst and finger-pointing?
Very good points, let’s address some of these from our perspective.
A special MEC meeting has been scheduled by the MEC chairman for July 21-22. We have been informed this meeting will take place in Reston, Va., close to Herndon (Washington, D.C.). We are opposed to this location as it presents extraordinary challenges for pilots wishing to attend the meeting.
o Hyatt Regency Reston, 1800 Presidents Street, Reston, VA 20190
However, with 65% of membership rejecting the TA, we consider this a mandate from the pilots to not play politics, seek damage control for self interests, or rearrange the deck chairs to protect the political structure or retain power and or positions for individuals or groups within ALPA.
We must operate with clear heads and not point fingers, but do what the pilots directed. Make no mistake—this will not be easy. It will be difficult for some initially, but we believe others must objectively assess what went wrong and what can be done differently to meet the direction of the pilots, and the pilots have made their statement very clear.
Your captain and first officer rep are in favor of repolling the membership and cross-checking this with past survey data, especially now that we are living the process, unlike the past survey where pilots were polled many months before contract talks started. This polling will likely be more pointed, based on what we have seen in the recent TA.
We believe that certain changes to personnel may be necessary to ensure we have the best team in place moving forward. The status quo may not be up to the task of what the pilots seek. In the short term, this opportunity for change can only happen if some of the representatives who supported the original agreement (TA) agree.
There are three possibilities regarding any such change:
o Resignations o The majority of the current MEC takes action o The majority of the current MEC is not willing to make changes
What we do not want is a rush for another inadequate deal prior to sound decisions being made and communicated to the membership!
If all of the above fails, or the other 11 voters seem unmoved in the reality of the TA vote we will stay in the minority similar to the TA. At this point we could find ourselves in a lame duck session, or a split MEC until elections are conducted in the fall. (The following bases have regular elections this year—ATL, SLC, and DTW. Newly elected reps would be seated March 2016.)
Post-rejection of TA As we laid out in the last chairman’s update:
Management will continue to talk to us; why wouldn’t they? Their needs and wants will not go away by themselves.
Decisions will be made on mutual needs of both parties
We continue to believe that our negotiations not likely to require the services of the NMB. That said, if no deal is reached by March 1, 2016, both parties have agreed to request their assistance.
More importantly, there is nothing that prevents us from negotiating after jointly filing—in fact, it is encouraged.
In the meantime We will continue to work under our current PWA.
PWA remains amendable on December 31, 2015. The MEC will meet to determine a plan moving forward and discuss any potential changes necessary to personnel, strategy, and logistics moving forward.
We will continue to bargain in good faith as required under the RLA. Why wouldn’t we, and why wouldn’t the company?
Delta’s Q2 earnings report will come out Wednesday, July 15, and we anticipate that it will contain good news for our airline.
SWA, FedEx, and UPS remain in mediation and continue to seek resolutions to each of their negotiations.
Delays in returning calls and texts We have received a large amount of input, feedback, and communications from you and Delta pilots from other councils. We can only expect this to continue so long as we remain in negotiations. There might be a delay in our response, especially to “nonemergency” contacts, and there have been times where your input has fallen through the cracks completely—we do apologize. In these cases, please try again, maybe via a different delivery method; we usually don’t miss two calls, e-mails, or texts from the same person.
Once again, we thank everyone for his or her hard work and efforts during the TA process. Please stay engaged and contact us with any questions or concerns.
Fraternally, Jon and Eric
Jon Lewis, Captain Rep Chairman [email protected] 715-896-1963
Eric Hall, F/O Rep Vice Chairman [email protected] 612-805-5379
Fellow Council 1 Pilots,
By now, many of you have heard that on Friday, July 10, 2015, the membership rejected the TA. The tentative agreement had an overwhelming participation rate:
97% (approx. 10,713 pilots) voted
65% (approx. 6,947 pilots) voted against ratifying the tentative agreement
35% (approx. 3,766 pilots) voted for ratifying the tentative agreement
We have a new-found level of respect and gratitude for what our pilots in Council 1 and what the entire DAL pilot group dealt with as you were left with a very difficult decision. By a large margin, 65% of pilots clearly rejected the company’s proposals and the resulting TA. Why? After meeting with many pilots in the past month, we were informed that the TA simply was not the contract you expected with all the past sacrifices the group endured, especially while we are in the best economic environment we have ever seen. Our pilots truly believe we to are stakeholders in Delta, and want what’s best for employees, the company, and our passengers.
Moving forward In a past update, we acknowledged the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA. You made the decision! It is time for the MEC to roll up their sleeves and accept the fact that 65% of the pilots, a significant number, expect to be treated like professionals and do not want to be talked down to, told what is best for them, and the survey ignored. More importantly, we have heard the following concerns from our pilots:
How do we move forward with the same leadership and negotiating team that seemed to feel that this was the best they could achieve?
Those who listened to the pilots are still in the minority; will this just create more angst and finger-pointing?
Very good points, let’s address some of these from our perspective.
A special MEC meeting has been scheduled by the MEC chairman for July 21-22. We have been informed this meeting will take place in Reston, Va., close to Herndon (Washington, D.C.). We are opposed to this location as it presents extraordinary challenges for pilots wishing to attend the meeting.
o Hyatt Regency Reston, 1800 Presidents Street, Reston, VA 20190
However, with 65% of membership rejecting the TA, we consider this a mandate from the pilots to not play politics, seek damage control for self interests, or rearrange the deck chairs to protect the political structure or retain power and or positions for individuals or groups within ALPA.
We must operate with clear heads and not point fingers, but do what the pilots directed. Make no mistake—this will not be easy. It will be difficult for some initially, but we believe others must objectively assess what went wrong and what can be done differently to meet the direction of the pilots, and the pilots have made their statement very clear.
Your captain and first officer rep are in favor of repolling the membership and cross-checking this with past survey data, especially now that we are living the process, unlike the past survey where pilots were polled many months before contract talks started. This polling will likely be more pointed, based on what we have seen in the recent TA.
We believe that certain changes to personnel may be necessary to ensure we have the best team in place moving forward. The status quo may not be up to the task of what the pilots seek. In the short term, this opportunity for change can only happen if some of the representatives who supported the original agreement (TA) agree.
There are three possibilities regarding any such change:
o Resignations o The majority of the current MEC takes action o The majority of the current MEC is not willing to make changes
What we do not want is a rush for another inadequate deal prior to sound decisions being made and communicated to the membership!
If all of the above fails, or the other 11 voters seem unmoved in the reality of the TA vote we will stay in the minority similar to the TA. At this point we could find ourselves in a lame duck session, or a split MEC until elections are conducted in the fall. (The following bases have regular elections this year—ATL, SLC, and DTW. Newly elected reps would be seated March 2016.)
Post-rejection of TA As we laid out in the last chairman’s update:
Management will continue to talk to us; why wouldn’t they? Their needs and wants will not go away by themselves.
Decisions will be made on mutual needs of both parties
We continue to believe that our negotiations not likely to require the services of the NMB. That said, if no deal is reached by March 1, 2016, both parties have agreed to request their assistance.
More importantly, there is nothing that prevents us from negotiating after jointly filing—in fact, it is encouraged.
In the meantime We will continue to work under our current PWA.
PWA remains amendable on December 31, 2015. The MEC will meet to determine a plan moving forward and discuss any potential changes necessary to personnel, strategy, and logistics moving forward.
We will continue to bargain in good faith as required under the RLA. Why wouldn’t we, and why wouldn’t the company?
Delta’s Q2 earnings report will come out Wednesday, July 15, and we anticipate that it will contain good news for our airline.
SWA, FedEx, and UPS remain in mediation and continue to seek resolutions to each of their negotiations.
Delays in returning calls and texts We have received a large amount of input, feedback, and communications from you and Delta pilots from other councils. We can only expect this to continue so long as we remain in negotiations. There might be a delay in our response, especially to “nonemergency” contacts, and there have been times where your input has fallen through the cracks completely—we do apologize. In these cases, please try again, maybe via a different delivery method; we usually don’t miss two calls, e-mails, or texts from the same person.
Once again, we thank everyone for his or her hard work and efforts during the TA process. Please stay engaged and contact us with any questions or concerns.
Fraternally, Jon and Eric
Jon Lewis, Captain Rep Chairman [email protected] 715-896-1963
Eric Hall, F/O Rep Vice Chairman [email protected] 612-805-5379
#2
Snake
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
"the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA."
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
#3
Banned
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
"the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA."
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
#4
"the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA."
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
Now we have set the precedent that if we can't negotiate an agreement that the MEC can recommend, we just vote for MEMRAT and see what sticks. This is not leadership or exercising good judgment and responsibility for your position as an elected representative.
As long as we are making corrections, lets get the corrected version of the first Negotiators notepad following the TA.
"The first Negotiators’ Notepad from last night contained a small but significant deviation from the actual resolution. This resolution did not give the TA the “approval of the MEC”, but rather simply approved it to be submitted for MEMRAT. This was a specific point of formal and informal discussion prior to the vote. Note that we were voting against the TA for being inadequate, not against allowing MEMRAT in general."
#5
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
"the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA."
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
#6
"the burden to vote on the TA was unduly laid upon your shoulders as to accept or reject the TA."
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
There was $1.1 billion on offer, so maybe some of us wanted the OPPORTUNITY to vote on that? This decision was monumentally bigger than the 10 votes on the MEC that could determine our path in collective bargaining for the next six years. But they are genuinely sorry that any of us had to stake out a position, because that is something they equate with political suicide.
The date by which both parties agree to jointly petition the NMB is March 31st, not the 1st. Don't show up early and wreck the surprise, genius.
Wise up.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



