acl65pilot

I voted for Malone. I was one of a handful of votes he had before the election meeting started.

I voted for every member of the Negotiating Committee that got elected.

I want this MEC insanely successful. Do not forget that the previous MEC set the redirection.

I will leave it at this. Contrary to popular belief, my personal desires and what was best for me politically took/take a back seat to what my individual analysis and the memberships desires were/are. The survey is aspirational and nature. We did not hit everything but to say it was disregarded is hogwash. In the redo, there is no way the new MEC will get everything. Don't hold them to that. Its never happened, ever.

You also agreed with my decision to send the TA to the membership.

How best:

The die is cast, "WE" collectively voted no in a democratic process. The decision was a we decision. We can point fingers all day long on this or that, and what the pilots did or did not believe. Right now one thing is fore-certain, none of that will get us a new contract. Mistakes were made on both sides last time. Lessons have been learned by all. Anyone who says differently is not being honest. Mistakes will be made this time. With a lot of changeover, its inevitable.

The difference is last time the impetus was to get the best deal we could quickly. It was an opportunity for another early deal. We passed on it. That's fine, we now go the more traditional route. That likely will take time, and that was clearly stated last year to the MEC. Now the new MEC just needs to get a deal the pilot group will support and can wait as long as it takes because the pilots choose the path.

We went back multiple times and could not even move value. Everyone that was in the room said the company was truly done. We had a split MEC. That is a path to nowhere fast. All of these were significant data points in my decision. So was my personal industry and macro analysis.

Should we have walked away? no. The company likely did not believe that the pilot group was where we said it was. They now know, but to date that has not changed their position on where the value added limit is. The TA had to be seen and voted on by the membership and the path had to be chosen by all of us. It was, and now we have to get a deal that all of us will support.

There is a path here, and I am sure that the Strategic Planning committee chaired by Art Aaron has laid or will lay out a path for the MEC to agree or disagree with. If I was to offer advice to the MEC it would be to listen to these individuals on the strat planning and negotiating committee. They are the people in the room who live this day in and day out, not the reps.


The company likely has made a cost-risk analysis and will take risk over cost beyond a certain level. It is the negotiators job to find that line. That line moves with the economy and the industry trends. If the company believes that the negotiators have the authority to TA a deal and that the MEC is empowered by the pilots to negotiate on their behalf, I believe the company will start seriously negotiating. More familiarity with the NC and MEC will provide that proof.

Having the company take a read at a MEC meeting with the meet and greet is a very good idea. The company is honest and frank with the MEC, and the MEC can be honest and frank with them. The MEC does not negotiate with the company but body language is important.

I personally want the new MEC insanely successful. I prefer to be rich than right. Its a negotiation, and not a demand based system. The NMB makes both parties engage in interest based bargaining and if that is not witnessed they see no path to a deal.

I strongly suspect there is a better deal to be had, but its not 22% with none of the company's desires being addressed. They will never sign on the line, nor will they be forced to by the NMB. Its not the rejected TA either. Its in the middle somewhere. (I will not be specific on where I see the deal because everyone reads this) Polling is now continuous as it should have been last year, and some asked for that. It will show the peaks and valleys of the pilots desires. It will help time when the right time for a deal to be TAed is.

65-35 provides leverage, and its the best leverage there is, but it must be used to get a deal that can be made. Not one that we all desire but the company would never agree too. Knowing the difference is leadership, and I compel and support our new MEC to find that deal.

acl65pilot

Nope. Not doing any ALPA work at this time. Doesn't mean I am not willing or will not do work again at some time, but for now, I am catching up on three years of delayed projects at my house.

My point is, if you look at the raises given to the other employees since the merger, the Dec raise was 3.5 years of raises if you average those historical raises.

You seem to forget that I irritated plenty of people on that side of the issues too.

Check Essential

Check Essential

Good call.
No point in rehashing 2015.

Let's concentrate on the future.

Delta Air Lines is printing money. Insane amounts of money.
Ed Bastian is sitting on tons of cash. So much that he can't figure out what to do with it all.
How can we convince him some of that cash is rightfully ours?
That's the only question that matters now.

JungleBus

Thanks for your support of the new MEC, ACL. The experience of the last eight months could have embittered you like it did a few other former ALPA volunteers; I'm glad to see it hasn't. I've been saying for a while now that a pilot group that is 65% unified isn't very unified at all. Time for us all to move on together. I'm not terribly interested in rehashing TA2015 for the umpteenth time. About two-thirds of us decided the net package wasn't enough and we were willing to risk going a more traditional route to try and get more. Will we? Time will tell, I guess. But there's no question in my mind that *any* chance of success with the traditional route will require the sort of pilot group unity that management can see and feel. Glad to see you're on board.

acl65pilot

Yes, it can't be undone and that deal is gone. Now that I am in the cheap seats I can be critical as well. I still do all my own analysis and will continue to follow all of it just like it did, prior and during the last bit.

I would have preferred to continue the work but I am not going to be upset that I am not currently making the decisions. Everything happens for a reason, and I am not one to get locked up in the past. I just want product over politics, and to do that does means that some will go after seated reps if they make difficult decisions. It goes with the territory.

We are where we are, so lets compel our reps to get to a point where the deal exists and be leaders. They do that, I am fully supportive.

Oh and if you don't donate to ALPA PAC. My personal opinion is the events in HND happened because we at the DAL pilot group were focused inward.(UAL has a Japanese partner and it does not effect FDX, its a DALPA issue) We need to have focus inward and outward. The Status quo of the last half of a decade was done way with very quickly. The first opportunity that was presented was used. We need to use that as a lesson.

Its a lesson on what could happen with the ME3. That one will be irreversible and much worse.

tripled

ACL it's good to see you back here. Thanks for jumping into the ring and working for us when many would rather criticize. In the past, your 'dot-connecting' was very interesting and I hope you resume it for us here. Best wishes for the future,

tripled

Purple Drank

Acl65, are you going to work at ALPA national? I'm going to keep asking until you answer.

formerdal

God you are a pain. I have yet to read a positive post from you since you have been on this forum. He is willing to get on here and explain himself outright. No negativity like the other guys, willing to take calls and explain his position. I give him credit for all of that. I bet he would have no problem doing the same in person. Call him, I dare you!

Are going to stop being a jerk? I'm going to keep asking you until you answer...when will you find something productive to say? All you seem to be able to do is criticize or come up with negative comments. Frankly, you serve no purpose.


Sorry everyone, just couldn't take it any more...

Schwanker

I thought it was a fair question. Many were interested in the reasons for his support behind 2015. Was it for self promotion within ALPA or that he thought it was a good deal for the pilot group. People had concerns.

I want to know why my reps vote one way or another. Also, there was mention he supported TA2015 partially because our operating margins were deteriorating. I'm curious where this information came from as the message to Wall Street is margins keep improving--significantly. It was not time to cave on profit sharing.