Malone Divides = We Subtract
09-04-2016, 06:14 PM
#171
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 300
deadseal, I don't follow the APC Delta players closely enough to know who is being a constant pain in the a$$, and I actually agree with you that work rules need to be preserved at almost any cost as they are more valuable WRT to QOL and they always cost more to get back.
The only point I am trying to make is that DALPA has led the piloting profession out of the 9/11, Chapter 11 doldrums and the Delta pilot no vote on your last TA was critical in the next leg up in pattern bargaining. But the substandard TA was not a reflection on 'ALPA' per se, but on your elected leadership not recognizing that they needed to shift gears from what had been a smart 'go along, get along' strategy to one that took advantage of the pilot/pay shortage. United's extension was an attempt to out-Delta Delta with proactive employee relations or at least the perception of them.
Those who are new to this or who have never done extensive pilot union work are ofter too quick to blame 'ALPA' when things don't seem to be going our way when it is actually democratic representation or unions in general they resent. Delta pilots run DALPA and ALPA Int'l and Delta pilots would run DPA or Delta Teamsters. They only thing leaving ALPA would do would to weaken pilot labor strength.
The only point I am trying to make is that DALPA has led the piloting profession out of the 9/11, Chapter 11 doldrums and the Delta pilot no vote on your last TA was critical in the next leg up in pattern bargaining. But the substandard TA was not a reflection on 'ALPA' per se, but on your elected leadership not recognizing that they needed to shift gears from what had been a smart 'go along, get along' strategy to one that took advantage of the pilot/pay shortage. United's extension was an attempt to out-Delta Delta with proactive employee relations or at least the perception of them.
Those who are new to this or who have never done extensive pilot union work are ofter too quick to blame 'ALPA' when things don't seem to be going our way when it is actually democratic representation or unions in general they resent. Delta pilots run DALPA and ALPA Int'l and Delta pilots would run DPA or Delta Teamsters. They only thing leaving ALPA would do would to weaken pilot labor strength.
09-04-2016, 06:27 PM
#172
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
If you can't recognize my observation is not weighted to the magnitude of cost.... but instead the result achieved for such an expenditure of resources..... well, I can't help you.
Last edited by BobZ; 09-04-2016 at 06:42 PM.
09-04-2016, 06:51 PM
#173
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,415
Hilarious from the source of continual griping about how much money its costing him by the rest of us not cooperating with mass surrender.
If you can't recognize my observation is not weighted to the magnitude of cost.... but instead the result achieved for such an expenditure of resources..... well, I can't help you.
If you can't recognize my observation is not weighted to the magnitude of cost.... but instead the result achieved for such an expenditure of resources..... well, I can't help you.
I'll ask. Should we still be flying at 1935 pay rates, rejecting TAs for 80 years, so we can say "we'll show em!" forever? At some point you have a deal and you move on.
That doesn't mean that you take the dealer's first offer, but at some point the Model T becomes obsolete.
While I think that most of the NO voters actually want to vote for a great TA that sells itself, I also honestly think that about 20% don't want ANY TA no matter how good. Half of those are only interested in torpedoing DALPA at any cost, and the other half just find it more fun to be a permanent member of the Just Say No crowd. They don't read any tentative language, they don't stay informed...they just vote no, and then claim some smug sense of moral superiority that isn't warranted.
While I admit that there are permanent yes voters on the opposite side of the equation, I am not sure who is worse.
09-04-2016, 06:58 PM
#174
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
Hilarious from the source of continual griping about how much money its costing him by the rest of us not cooperating with mass surrender.
If you can't recognize my observation is not weighted to the magnitude of cost.... but instead the result achieved for such an expenditure of resources..... well, I can't help you.
If you can't recognize my observation is not weighted to the magnitude of cost.... but instead the result achieved for such an expenditure of resources..... well, I can't help you.
09-04-2016, 07:26 PM
#175
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
How do you characterize "mass surrender?" Anyone disagreeing with you? Eventually reaching a TA, any TA, even a good one?
I'll ask. Should we still be flying at 1935 pay rates, rejecting TAs for 80 years, so we can say "we'll show em!" forever? At some point you have a deal and you move on.
That doesn't mean that you take the dealer's first offer, but at some point the Model T becomes obsolete.
While I think that most of the NO voters actually want to vote for a great TA that sells itself, I also honestly think that about 20% don't want ANY TA no matter how good. Half of those are only interested in torpedoing DALPA at any cost, and the other half just find it more fun to be a permanent member of the Just Say No crowd. They don't read any tentative language, they don't stay informed...they just vote no, and then claim some smug sense of moral superiority that isn't warranted.
While I admit that there are permanent yes voters on the opposite side of the equation, I am not sure who is worse.
I'll ask. Should we still be flying at 1935 pay rates, rejecting TAs for 80 years, so we can say "we'll show em!" forever? At some point you have a deal and you move on.
That doesn't mean that you take the dealer's first offer, but at some point the Model T becomes obsolete.
While I think that most of the NO voters actually want to vote for a great TA that sells itself, I also honestly think that about 20% don't want ANY TA no matter how good. Half of those are only interested in torpedoing DALPA at any cost, and the other half just find it more fun to be a permanent member of the Just Say No crowd. They don't read any tentative language, they don't stay informed...they just vote no, and then claim some smug sense of moral superiority that isn't warranted.
While I admit that there are permanent yes voters on the opposite side of the equation, I am not sure who is worse.
What was put in front of this group was no model T......I would suggest given the magnitude of money and marketing invested to sell a galactic failure of achievement..... the Edsel would be a far more fitting comparison.
I guess that's what Mr secret agent man would call..... 'hyperbole'.
09-05-2016, 06:29 AM
#177
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 558
Why not just take one for the team bra, that way, 30% of us will be gone in 3-4 years and you guys can stand tall and strong and improve on what we "quitters" would be leaving you with?
You've said you're willing to "let it stand", but it would be a big payraise, even from that, so what's the harm? It's only 2-3 years or so.
I mean, it makes sense that if WE can't do it that surely YOU can do it in a couple of years, and you won't have the Dalpoids hindering you any more!
Come on....You can do it!!!!
You've said you're willing to "let it stand", but it would be a big payraise, even from that, so what's the harm? It's only 2-3 years or so.
I mean, it makes sense that if WE can't do it that surely YOU can do it in a couple of years, and you won't have the Dalpoids hindering you any more!
Come on....You can do it!!!!
Also, Malone can say the "polling data supports the TA" all he wants, if the MEMRAT kills it, he was obviously wrong, misinterpreting the data, or misleading us.
09-05-2016, 07:00 AM
#178
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 558
No, but can tell us what parts suck instead of trying to sugar coat a turd and telling us it's a doughnut!!
09-05-2016, 07:05 AM
#179
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 558
I'm just curious how you believe you can get the creators of the document to give you an honest heartfelt con assessment.
"Yeah guys, this particular part of the contract sucks".
Then what? If they justify it, you will call it a sales job, or capitulation, or surrender or...... I honestly don't see any way that the MEC can issue such a document and have any legitimacy in the eyes of those that have a 'con' bent to begin with. I guess what I am saying is there are those that need a reason to vote no, and those that need a reason to vote yes. So it seems it would be incumbent upon those that are inclined to vote no to produce the con paper to 'convince' the yes voters to vote no. But.... Their data would be suspect. Just as you are suspect of those that write the pro paper. So what do we do?
Help a bruddah out on this one.
"Yeah guys, this particular part of the contract sucks".
Then what? If they justify it, you will call it a sales job, or capitulation, or surrender or...... I honestly don't see any way that the MEC can issue such a document and have any legitimacy in the eyes of those that have a 'con' bent to begin with. I guess what I am saying is there are those that need a reason to vote no, and those that need a reason to vote yes. So it seems it would be incumbent upon those that are inclined to vote no to produce the con paper to 'convince' the yes voters to vote no. But.... Their data would be suspect. Just as you are suspect of those that write the pro paper. So what do we do?
Help a bruddah out on this one.
09-05-2016, 12:54 PM
#180
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 95
Puh-leeze. A pro/con paper?
Who ya gonna get to write it? Because it won't be me.
The last time we did a pro/con was for C2K. It turned into a trip to court. Press to test. Get us parked, and these twelve reps won't have anywhere to hide, or anyone else to blame.
I don't need another opinion piece to make my decisions. All I need is a calculator and a sharp pencil.
Who ya gonna get to write it? Because it won't be me.
The last time we did a pro/con was for C2K. It turned into a trip to court. Press to test. Get us parked, and these twelve reps won't have anywhere to hide, or anyone else to blame.
I don't need another opinion piece to make my decisions. All I need is a calculator and a sharp pencil.
If DALPA won't do it as they promised there are many on social media ready and willing to fill in for them.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
