New TA
10-25-2015 | 06:39 AM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
So, the role of the negotiating committee is to avoid all concessions and argue for pay raises.
They can use 3B4 (since the company already agreed to it) as the baseline and add the non contract pay raise to that. File the civil suit first (forget the toothless grievance).
They also need to make the argument that profit sharing should be left out of the calculus, balanced against the annuitized value of Americans frozen retirement, or whatever keeps it off the table.
Sick leave and work rules will be status quo. There's zero compelling argument to pattern those down.
There should be a viable argument for an annuity in the individual pilots name (to avoid any loss) due to profitability and the shaky ground the pbgc is on. 2.5% accrual per year based on pilot earnings that year 100% funded starting in 2016. Averts any danger of loss.
Daily pay rate for everything (vac, trng, etc.) and accrual matches fedex since our profits were 2x theirs.
Anything else.
Btw, this is not my dream list. This seems readily achievable to me through mediation. My dream list is restoration plus...achievable by a job action. But, we already agreed to mediation.
They can use 3B4 (since the company already agreed to it) as the baseline and add the non contract pay raise to that. File the civil suit first (forget the toothless grievance).
They also need to make the argument that profit sharing should be left out of the calculus, balanced against the annuitized value of Americans frozen retirement, or whatever keeps it off the table.
Sick leave and work rules will be status quo. There's zero compelling argument to pattern those down.
There should be a viable argument for an annuity in the individual pilots name (to avoid any loss) due to profitability and the shaky ground the pbgc is on. 2.5% accrual per year based on pilot earnings that year 100% funded starting in 2016. Averts any danger of loss.
Daily pay rate for everything (vac, trng, etc.) and accrual matches fedex since our profits were 2x theirs.
Anything else.
Btw, this is not my dream list. This seems readily achievable to me through mediation. My dream list is restoration plus...achievable by a job action. But, we already agreed to mediation.
10-25-2015 | 06:53 AM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,355
Likes: 34
You think you can get that all in mediation? Maybe with a release coming it will happen. Which board mediators have ever been shown to allow a one sided negotiation that lead to a TA? Not to say you should not seek those gains, but better plan on taking it to the next step.
10-25-2015 | 07:02 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Without even getting into how large or small of a raise he is saying that in the process of mediation you can get everything you want and the other party gets nothing. I have just never heard that happening in mediation.
10-25-2015 | 07:16 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
I really don't see how it is a bad thing and it may be a good thing. If the company really wants to get a deal, they can when we re-engage. If a deal is close when the time to apply rolls around, I'm sure an LOA could be reached to delay application. If not, I think it's better to get into mediation sooner. It's one of the steps we have to go through in the process. It's unavoidable so why not get into it ASAP?
Denny
10-25-2015 | 07:20 AM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
Denny
10-25-2015 | 07:40 AM
#86
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Jointly agreeing to apply for mediation in March after a Dec. 31 amendable date has been part of our contract for a couple of cycles now.
I really don't see how it is a bad thing and it may be a good thing. If the company really wants to get a deal, they can when we re-engage. If a deal is close when the time to apply rolls around, I'm sure an LOA could be reached to delay application. If not, I think it's better to get into mediation sooner. It's one of the steps we have to go through in the process. It's unavoidable so why not get into it ASAP?
Denny
I really don't see how it is a bad thing and it may be a good thing. If the company really wants to get a deal, they can when we re-engage. If a deal is close when the time to apply rolls around, I'm sure an LOA could be reached to delay application. If not, I think it's better to get into mediation sooner. It's one of the steps we have to go through in the process. It's unavoidable so why not get into it ASAP?
Denny
There's nothing special about mediation. Its just another hoop we have to jump through. In fact, its pretty much pointless. As I've said before; ever since the industry "consolidated" there is no chance that there will ever be a pilot strike at any of the big 4 airlines.
The NMB is irrelevant. By never allowing "self-help" and conducting negotiations for years and years beyond amendable dates, they have taken themselves out of the game. The sooner we realize that fact the better off we will be.
Here's an old post from before the TA got rejected and all the turmoil struck DALPA:
shiznit was making the same DALPA argument that pileit made to open this thread. ie= We have to cooperate with management and take whatever they offer or we won't get another contract for years and years. I don't agree. I think we have other ways to operate. The NMB is only relevant because management AND THE UNION find them useful as a scarewcrow to keep pilots under control.
Shiznit-
I don't know what's in this TA and therefore can't tell you if I'm for it or against it. But I do know one thing. The argument you make in that post really irritates me.
I'm mighty tired of my union being 100% passive, compliant and scared.
Scared of Anderson, scared of the NMB and scared of their own shadow.
And what's worse is using that fear as a weapon to control the membership.
We are not SWA or FDX or AMR.
There are plenty of things we can legally do to exert pressure on management to bargain in good faith. They seem to place great value on their success at taking labor risk off the table at Delta. The first thing we could do is start acting like a real union and put that risk right back on the table. FAST. And in a BIG WAY.
If this TA were to be rejected and Mr. Anderson stops bargaining in good faith and says he's going to go the "traditional route" (putting us "on ice" for years) the first thing we should announce is that we are putting him on ice and making it the #1 goal of ALPA to organize and unionize the flight attendants and mechanics and every other labor group on this property.
ALPA has had an official policy of letting the other employee groups twist in the wind while incompetent organization drives sputtered and stalled and failed. That policy of helping management defeat the other unions would end immediately. And you know what? I think we would succeed. We could have about 3 more unions at this company within a year. I think that might get management's attention.
And that would only be the first thing I would do. There's about 8 more.
So please knock it off with the "fear factor" posts -- telling pilots that if we don't capitulate to management's every wish then we will have to wait years to get a new contract. Its not true. We are NOT helpless. We CAN say no to management demands without getting put on ice.
I know ALPA doesn't want to abandon Moakism and the whole constructive relationship with management. Its been good for ALPA. It saves them a lot of money. But there comes a point when the pilots might have to stand up and defend ourselves. Whether ALPA likes it or not. We may have reached that point. We'll see on Tuesday.
I don't know what's in this TA and therefore can't tell you if I'm for it or against it. But I do know one thing. The argument you make in that post really irritates me.
I'm mighty tired of my union being 100% passive, compliant and scared.
Scared of Anderson, scared of the NMB and scared of their own shadow.
And what's worse is using that fear as a weapon to control the membership.
We are not SWA or FDX or AMR.
There are plenty of things we can legally do to exert pressure on management to bargain in good faith. They seem to place great value on their success at taking labor risk off the table at Delta. The first thing we could do is start acting like a real union and put that risk right back on the table. FAST. And in a BIG WAY.
If this TA were to be rejected and Mr. Anderson stops bargaining in good faith and says he's going to go the "traditional route" (putting us "on ice" for years) the first thing we should announce is that we are putting him on ice and making it the #1 goal of ALPA to organize and unionize the flight attendants and mechanics and every other labor group on this property.
ALPA has had an official policy of letting the other employee groups twist in the wind while incompetent organization drives sputtered and stalled and failed. That policy of helping management defeat the other unions would end immediately. And you know what? I think we would succeed. We could have about 3 more unions at this company within a year. I think that might get management's attention.
And that would only be the first thing I would do. There's about 8 more.
So please knock it off with the "fear factor" posts -- telling pilots that if we don't capitulate to management's every wish then we will have to wait years to get a new contract. Its not true. We are NOT helpless. We CAN say no to management demands without getting put on ice.
I know ALPA doesn't want to abandon Moakism and the whole constructive relationship with management. Its been good for ALPA. It saves them a lot of money. But there comes a point when the pilots might have to stand up and defend ourselves. Whether ALPA likes it or not. We may have reached that point. We'll see on Tuesday.
10-25-2015 | 07:47 AM
#87
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,327
Likes: 815
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
I agree with Tim Parker. Here is a quote from Tim from the mini roar from the spring of 2008.
“While the Railway Labor Act is a much amended, complicated beast, the real substance behind it is not. The Act was put in place to prevent the disruption of passenger and freight service in the United States caused by disputes between railroads and their employees, and was later amended to cover airlines. Its weapon is time; unions representing employees are bound not to disrupt the status quo while the process continues. The process dictates goodfaith bargaining, followed by mediation and the eventual release to self-help if previous efforts fail. This is a very political process influenced greatly by whichever political party has control. During the tenure of the current president, the National Mediation Board, whose three members are appointed by the president, has released not one single major hub-and-spoke airline to self-help.”
The current agreement provides for two ways to increase pay beyond the amendable date.
1) 3.B.4. ties our pay to the industry average. While management’s current tactics may delay the effectivity of this clause, they can’t eliminate it unless we agree to do so. The pay rate accumulation from other airlines will accrue while we are in negotiations. If management intends to hold our pay at current levels, that means they can never give an additional pay raise to non-contract employees.
2) 3.I is our profit sharing and ties our variable compensation to the profitability of Delta. This is key because it also aligns us with management’s goals and personal compensation. The payment is based on a percentage and is variable meaning it also increases automatically beyond the amendable date. The added benefit of not requiring further negotiations to increase the benefit allows for a continued share of the profits every year. If a year results in a loss, compensation costs remain in line with the rest of the industry because hourly rates would be the only expense. If the following year a profit is achieved, the profit sharing again pays a return automatically.
To remove the effectivity of these clauses is to return to the punitive process section 6 has always been. We need mechanisms in the contract that reach beyond the amendable date to ensure a backstop for delay. 3.B.4. alone has the potential to raise pay rates by 2.5 times the current rate over a 30 year career without ever agreeing to change the current agreement. While this is not the plan, retaining this provision ensures we don’t lose ground to the industry average. We will automatically hit a single every year non-contract employees get a raise.
Profit sharing continues beyond the amendable date and ties our pay to the profitability of the entire business. As Delta grows its equity holdings and JV operations we will become a smaller percentage of the operation generating profits. This keeps us relevant and compensated for the decisions to not expand organically.
We have finally achieved a counter to the section 6 time penalty. These clauses should be vigorously defended and expanded.
“While the Railway Labor Act is a much amended, complicated beast, the real substance behind it is not. The Act was put in place to prevent the disruption of passenger and freight service in the United States caused by disputes between railroads and their employees, and was later amended to cover airlines. Its weapon is time; unions representing employees are bound not to disrupt the status quo while the process continues. The process dictates goodfaith bargaining, followed by mediation and the eventual release to self-help if previous efforts fail. This is a very political process influenced greatly by whichever political party has control. During the tenure of the current president, the National Mediation Board, whose three members are appointed by the president, has released not one single major hub-and-spoke airline to self-help.”
The current agreement provides for two ways to increase pay beyond the amendable date.
1) 3.B.4. ties our pay to the industry average. While management’s current tactics may delay the effectivity of this clause, they can’t eliminate it unless we agree to do so. The pay rate accumulation from other airlines will accrue while we are in negotiations. If management intends to hold our pay at current levels, that means they can never give an additional pay raise to non-contract employees.
2) 3.I is our profit sharing and ties our variable compensation to the profitability of Delta. This is key because it also aligns us with management’s goals and personal compensation. The payment is based on a percentage and is variable meaning it also increases automatically beyond the amendable date. The added benefit of not requiring further negotiations to increase the benefit allows for a continued share of the profits every year. If a year results in a loss, compensation costs remain in line with the rest of the industry because hourly rates would be the only expense. If the following year a profit is achieved, the profit sharing again pays a return automatically.
To remove the effectivity of these clauses is to return to the punitive process section 6 has always been. We need mechanisms in the contract that reach beyond the amendable date to ensure a backstop for delay. 3.B.4. alone has the potential to raise pay rates by 2.5 times the current rate over a 30 year career without ever agreeing to change the current agreement. While this is not the plan, retaining this provision ensures we don’t lose ground to the industry average. We will automatically hit a single every year non-contract employees get a raise.
Profit sharing continues beyond the amendable date and ties our pay to the profitability of the entire business. As Delta grows its equity holdings and JV operations we will become a smaller percentage of the operation generating profits. This keeps us relevant and compensated for the decisions to not expand organically.
We have finally achieved a counter to the section 6 time penalty. These clauses should be vigorously defended and expanded.
10-25-2015 | 10:41 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,355
Likes: 34
The yes voters are being myopic for just looking at the new TA. If you look at the last 10 years, it's an easy argument to the mediation board that we have already given more than enough. Add to that, every other group has been made whole since bankruptcy but the pilots and it's an even easier win.
10-25-2015 | 11:55 AM
#89
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
The yes voters are being myopic for just looking at the new TA. If you look at the last 10 years, it's an easy argument to the mediation board that we have already given more than enough. Add to that, every other group has been made whole since bankruptcy but the pilots and it's an even easier win.
THEN, you ask the NMB how much THEY make now, and what their retirement plans are worth today, compared to 2004.
Then you announce to the Media the Delta Pilots WILL strike if we are not RESTORED to our Pre-Bankruptcy pay/retirement levels.
Why are some of you Yes Men such cowards?
(not you CaptCrunch, but some of the tools above)
10-25-2015 | 01:05 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Everything about what has happened is undisputed. The question is if it has ever had influence with a mediator? No one is in disagreement on the changes that have occurred. Will the mediator weigh that more than ever before? I guess we will have to wait and see.
