When A 777A Retires........
09-09-2015 | 04:37 AM
#151
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
I don't think the company would have ever wanted it to be restricted to in category only OE can be pulled. You look at my category and you see that the oe for all 4 bases and primarily done out of here. Why would they want to chance us being bought off like we are now, negates the whole reason for demanding this paragraph.
And I know line 6, which is untouched from the current PWA was what Slow said was where the in category requirement came from. But line 6 is line 6, line X is not a subparagraph of 6. And line 6 had to specificy that it was category , line X is missing that specific term... for a reason.
And I know line 6, which is untouched from the current PWA was what Slow said was where the in category requirement came from. But line 6 is line 6, line X is not a subparagraph of 6. And line 6 had to specificy that it was category , line X is missing that specific term... for a reason.
09-09-2015 | 04:53 AM
#152
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
From: F/O
Please state your source on this. When did the MEC negotiate this?
09-09-2015 | 05:02 AM
#153
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
https://https://dal.alpa.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=8016&l anguage=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=2593
09-09-2015 | 05:17 AM
#154
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
From: F/O
C2015 road shows. They negotiated it as part of the agreement related to OE trip pulls to LIMIT the number of trips pulled. It's in the road show slides (slide 91) too.
https://https://dal.alpa.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=8016&l anguage=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=2593
https://https://dal.alpa.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=8016&l anguage=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=2593
I see where it was in the DALPA slides but I can't find it in the TA language so where is the legally binding document that spells out the limitation? Are you assuming there was a side agreement or was there some communication from DALPA that referenced it?
09-09-2015 | 05:30 AM
#155
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
BTW, I live well on what I make now. There are not only work rule issues but scope issues as well. The TA was a disaster. Admit it and move on.
09-09-2015 | 05:38 AM
#156
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,324
Likes: 53
I think we're tired of our iron clad language which leads to: "DUH.... We didn't think they'd do that"
Move along little boy.
09-09-2015 | 07:01 AM
#157
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 0
Not exactly the same. DAL A350's will have 20-25 more seats and 20-25% less fuel burn.
09-09-2015 | 08:14 AM
#158
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
It's unfortunate that guys here wish to rewrite the history of this agreement.
09-09-2015 | 08:19 AM
#159
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
You're wrong. Don't believe me. Ask your own reps or Contract Admin about how the Negotiators notes and clarifying letters are a routine part or our contractual enforcement. I showed that you don't know the details of the agreement you helped vote down, and your embarrassed. I get it. It's human nature, and it takes a big man to admit he's wrong, but I know you can do it. 20,000+ posts on here. Impressive. You're bound to be wrong once in a while.
09-09-2015 | 08:32 AM
#160
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,253
Likes: 96
From: DAL 330
There are many contractually enforceable items that are not in the TA. At the road shows, the Negotiating Committee referenced the contractually binding letter that limited the OE pulls to in-base OEs. Don't believe me. Call Contract Admin or your own reps. Ask them if it's routine to have these types of agreements.
It's unfortunate that guys here wish to rewrite the history of this agreement.
It's unfortunate that guys here wish to rewrite the history of this agreement.
Yes but they normally come out over the years as unforeseen situations arise.
If this situation is known prior to the TA even being voted on why not just put it in the contract language?
Call me skeptical on this, very skeptical.
Scoop
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
