"On the Matter of the Negotiating Committee"



One of the most critical matters immediately before the Delta MEC for their decision is the makeup of the Negotiating Committee as it re-enters bargaining with the Company. A very recent independent analysis of that issue provided the following primary conclusions:

A. That by their ardent support for a justifiably member-rejected Tentative Agreement, the Negotiating Committee has 1) demonstrated detrimental philosophical and practical separation from their clients, the rank-and-file pilots of Delta Air Lines; 2) irretrievably lost the trust of the rank-and-file; and 3) demonstrated to both the pilot group and to their counterparty, Delta Air Lines management, agreement with an unacceptably low net settlement concept.

B. That retention and re-use of the current Negotiating Committee will 1) constitute an arguable failure of the Air Line Pilots Association Delta Air Lines Master Executive Council to serve the best bargaining interests of the Delta pilots, and 2) directly impact the election voting (both Special/Recall and General) of the membership, as well as their conduct regarding possible secession from or replacement of the Association at Delta.

Considering "the best net interests of the pilots of Delta Air Lines", the report recommended:

A. That the resignation of all current members of the Delta MEC Negotiating Committee be immediately obtained (or they be procedurally removed from office);

B. That the current members of the Delta MEC Negotiating Committee be requested to participate and contribute as supporting staff to a newly reconstituted Negotiating Committee, and

C. That the Delta MEC declare a 60-day or greater (as needed) negotiations moratorium with the Company pending reconstitution and redirection of the Negotiating Committee.

The full report did include consideration of a number of theoretical positives to retaining the current Negotiating Committee members, however it was determined that such factors were either not specifically applicable in this case or were of significantly lesser value than the arguments against doing so.

Regardless the natural dissatisfaction and tendency to "call for heads", this is not at all a matter of "firing for cause" as if the Negotiators did anything "wrong" (although there is definitely a fair indication of some suboptimal skill or performance by the team), rather it is that especially by their strong advocacy and courses of action in the time between the TA being reached and the membership ratification (MEMRAT) vote, they have rendered themselves unusable for the process going forward. To continue to present them as the pilots' representative Negotiators would set conditions for a follow-on agreement at something near a "50%+1" approval level; that is to say, a new TA that may well pass MEMRAT, but which will be a disservice to the pilot group (and likely spell tremendous trouble for the Association on Delta's and other properties afterwards). With both respect and honesty, it's not as if this negotiating team is of any special or irreplaceable talent. Keeping in mind that the Negotiating Committee as a body belongs to the membership, and that action on this issue may be taken at the next MEC Meeting only days away in very early August, it is imperative that rank-and-file pilots promptly communicate their opinions on this matter to their Local Representatives.

 

Who authored this analysis?

 

I think it's just a thought piece. But, I also think it is correct pragmatically.

 

Himself most likely.

 

I agree with the premise.

It seems pretty polished for an APC post. Seems like something a lawyer would write.

Is that your work, gzsg?

 

I think it's a copy and paste. You know for discussion and all.

 

"independent analysis"???

Yeah, right...

 

Maybe you'd prefer Harwood's take?

 

Who ever wrote it nailed it.

 

I did not write it. Zoro did.