+ 6,000,000,000 worth of buy backs.

 

5) How ineffective DALPA, our negotiators, and MEC Chair would be.
6) How MD would directly attempt to manipulate the process.

 

You're right on one count: I didn't expect the NC and Donatelli to make such lobsided presentations, i.e. full-blown sales-jobs. Add to that that I didn't expect the strength of the opposite sales-job, and in particular, their ability to control the "facts". Seldom do you find a no-voter that actually knew what was in the contract. In the end, it was a question of which sales-job turned people off the most, and since 1) a lot of people have repeatedly warned ALPA about pushing TA's too aggressively, and 2) the TA was marginal...

What you're missing, I think, is the role of the company, and the entire MEC. The company clearly has decided to invest very close to the minimum they can be compelled to invest. Actually, they really can't be compelled to invest much at all right now, but they want to sell the labor peace story to the press and PS restructuring to Wall Street. They put about $100K per pilot on the table between now and 2018, but that doesn't quite meet what a lot of people wanted. Beats what we can get, but not a lot of people have made the transition from desires to achievable results. There, the MEC failed us. They should have quit selling "On-Time, On-Target", but I think they did have a survey asking them to deliver a contract early. I'm sure no one was asking for concessions, but everyone was asking for money, early. This was the path. The entire MEC followed along, through nine (9) direction meetings, working through all the details you're seeing and hating now, like 23.G.5. They collectively sent the NC back in several times, with clear instructions, which they followed.

Now, you've got 8 reps that pull back and distance themselves from the sausage-making process they insisted on, a tone-deaf Donatelli playing in their hands by singing the praises of this thing a little too much, too early (he finally got a hold of himself with the last letter), a company that took a very long time to own their threats, and a ****ed-off group that doesn't quite understand how we went from the survey to the TA.

"How" is by ignoring the signs. In hindsight, we were pretty dismissive of contract comparisons, judging them to be manipulative. We shrugged when we read Dickson's memos on productivity. I remember personally ranting about pattern-bargaining, and saying we should not be benchmarked against the industry, but against Delta's profits. "Should" not. But evidently, the process doesn't lead to that. We can be here still in 29 months, still talking about "should", but negotiating for AMR + 1. So, yeah, I can see how people were shocked by the TA, and the alternatives. I know I wasn't happy when I read the bullet points, and it took a while to come to terms with the reality of my survey colliding with the greed of the shareholders.

 

You lost me at " on one count." Man, you need to write with fewer words.

Did you see the announcement about more poling? Are you going to get poled again?

 

This TA like the JCBA and C2012, had a one sided sales job. The PowerPoint presentations were one sided and we were asked to hold all questions to the end. Each roadshow was allotted 3 hours and 2.5 of those were in the sales job.

Last time DN started a FB page but made it secret and people couldn't find it, this time the FB page was closed but able to be found. I think what really sunk this TA was during the open MEC meeting, the MEC's FB page comments were overwhelmingly negative, so in classic CYA fashion they closed down the comments. Not realizing they should be sensing a disturbance in the force.

The comm piece never pivoted and they entered a death spiral instead of a spin (for my T-34C brethren).

 

I think several factors helped kill the TA, but the yes and no sales-jobs worked in near-perfect harmony, but I think you're correctly pointing out one of the crucial errors.

As for the comm piece, the last letter was good, I thought. Had the NC made aless sanguine presentation, and had Donatelli limited himself to the last letter, that would have been sufficient. I don't know if the TA would have passed, but I would have been satisfied if it had been judged on its' own merits, up or down.

Don't forget there was quite a bit of outside help entering the spin, however. I didn't personally like Donatelli's presentation, but it was different taken as a whole, than in the 12-second "PEB" segment.

 

I was going to try not to post today....


But Sink,

You don't think "no" voters knew what was in the TA?

 

Yeah, I raise the



The average line Pilot is a lot more educated than these elitists believe.

 

It's such an egregious statement I think he should explain it.

 

New....let me 'splain the core alpa philosophy behind arriving at that destination.

Line pilots are too stupid to understand, let alone be entrusted with what is in their best interest.

So the failed ta has to be the result of some interrupting presence that prevented the alpa experts informing and guiding the line pilots to the conclusion it was in their best interest to affirm the agreement.

personally...I didn't need to read any further than the first priority on my list....don't f'k with the profit sharing.