View Poll Results: Who is the most desperate to get a TA?
DAL
58
47.93%
DALPA/C44
55
45.45%
Pilots
8
6.61%
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll
Poll: Who wanted a TA more?
09-09-2015 | 10:29 AM
#51
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,324
Likes: 53
Look, you guys keep up with this phony math and phony bluster. I don't hate NWA, I am comparing their results to the results from the DAL method of operation. Their performance was much, much worse. That is just real, simple math, it is not hate. Now we have the NWA method at DAL. Let's see how it works.
At the time of the merger, a NWA 757 Captain made $144 an hour with a 6% net DC for the entire pilot group. Now he is making $227 with a 15% DC. That is 67% over 7 years. Let's see what you guys do to beat that. See ya.
At the time of the merger, a NWA 757 Captain made $144 an hour with a 6% net DC for the entire pilot group. Now he is making $227 with a 15% DC. That is 67% over 7 years. Let's see what you guys do to beat that. See ya.
09-09-2015 | 12:42 PM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,872
Likes: 189
Almost every pilot North or South took a large paycut right after the merger. There was a worldwide financial collapse that led to a reduction in system block hours and a surplus of 600 pilots. Prior to that both contracts delivered almost to the minute the same total credit hours for pay. There were substantial differences in work rules however the end result was the same credit hours.
09-09-2015 | 01:19 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 922
Likes: 0
From: Decoupled
Now if you want to get back to the original topic: staffing. If management has a staffing problem, then what staffing concessions are you going to give them? I mean you say our leverage is that they have a staffing problem and you don't have any leverage unless you actually solve their staffing problem, right? So what concessions are you gong to give them to fix their staffing problems? I would like to see your head spin around that for a while.
It's not our job to solve their staffing problem. Where in our job description do you see "manager"? Get your head out your ass and quit trying to solve the self-induced management problem.
Your attitude and approach led to your failed TA. You are not management. We are a union. It's time your learned.
09-09-2015 | 01:28 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,685
Likes: 0
From: "Prof" button manipulator
It's not our job to solve their staffing problem. Where in our job description do you see "manager"? Get your head out your ass and quit trying to solve the self-induced management problem.
Your attitude and approach led to your failed TA. You are not management. We are a union. It's time your learned.
Your attitude and approach led to your failed TA. You are not management. We are a union. It's time your learned.
09-09-2015 | 02:52 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
It's not our job to solve their staffing problem. Where in our job description do you see "manager"? Get your head out your ass and quit trying to solve the self-induced management problem.
Your attitude and approach led to your failed TA. You are not management. We are a union. It's time your learned.
Your attitude and approach led to your failed TA. You are not management. We are a union. It's time your learned.
09-09-2015 | 03:09 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
You are obviously emotional about this. I'm not. It's business. OK, so we aren't management. But when THEY say "we made a mess and need changes to fix it: how much will it cost?" Your plan is... just say F-U? In all instances apparently you would respond F-U. And this is the entire strategy? I'm totally down with "not enough pay me more" but "F-U" isn't a strategy. OFG
09-09-2015 | 03:30 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
From: Power top
I read here the alleged sick leave abuse is calling in sick and greenslipping. Yeah, I've got a problem with that too. So fix that problem. I'd say 99% would agree.
Why a sledge hammer? C2012 wasn't enough fixing sick leave? When is it going to stop? That's the problem I have with it all.
Profit sharing. We negotiated it when profits were a pipe dream. They gave it, literally gave it to the rest of the company. Dumb move. I'll fix it, but for a little bit more than 6%. Restore vacations, pay us for training, it costs us money to go to training. My vacation day should equal a day I spend hauling people around.
This ain't a North vs. South thing. The more some preach we're too dumb to understand the more I get it, the union is out of touch.
Why a sledge hammer? C2012 wasn't enough fixing sick leave? When is it going to stop? That's the problem I have with it all.
Profit sharing. We negotiated it when profits were a pipe dream. They gave it, literally gave it to the rest of the company. Dumb move. I'll fix it, but for a little bit more than 6%. Restore vacations, pay us for training, it costs us money to go to training. My vacation day should equal a day I spend hauling people around.
This ain't a North vs. South thing. The more some preach we're too dumb to understand the more I get it, the union is out of touch.
09-09-2015 | 03:50 PM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 922
Likes: 0
From: Decoupled
You are obviously emotional about this. I'm not. It's business. OK, so we aren't management. But when THEY say "we made a mess and need changes to fix it: how much will it cost?" Your plan is... just say F-U? In all instances apparently you would respond F-U. And this is the entire strategy? I'm totally down with "not enough pay me more" but "F-U" isn't a strategy. OFG
I said, it's not my job. Big difference. Therein lies the problem.
You and your Proactive Appeasement group have the worst case of Stockholm Syndrome I have ever seen. You have completely identified with management and want to solve all of their perceived problems at our expense. That is not your job. Management is more than well compensated to solve these problems without your help. If they want our help, it's going to cost them.
We fly airplanes. BTW, we do it well.
It's just business.
09-09-2015 | 07:39 PM
#59
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,248
Likes: 707
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
You are obviously emotional about this. I'm not. It's business. OK, so we aren't management. But when THEY say "we made a mess and need changes to fix it: how much will it cost?" Your plan is... just say F-U? In all instances apparently you would respond F-U. And this is the entire strategy? I'm totally down with "not enough pay me more" but "F-U" isn't a strategy. OFG
We are not reinventing the wheel. Even though we are highly skilled rocket surgeons, we have a bargaining agent that was misguided in the their assumptions. We are now rededicating and reconfiguring said agent. This will take time and effort because of the previous miscalculation. When ready management and our agent have to make a new calculation about what is acceptable. If our agent undershoots again we will be right back here.
If management accepts RESTORATION, our new MEC chairman's word, this could be over before the holidays. There is no magic "strategy." When it's acceptable to both parties it will be done. As far as TA1, F-U try again. That's what we said as a group. 65/35
09-09-2015 | 08:32 PM
#60
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 2
From: Hates Commuting
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
