What motivates you? You defend anything that benefits management. Even a completely clear joint agreement to a 60 day arbitration that both parties agree on is not worthy of pilots displeasure. Don't look now but, your management is showing.

It doesn't force the arbitrator to do anything. It may, however, force the company to do something.

You mean 15-20% above our current 320 rate, or more appropriately, 15-20% above our 737-900 rate.

Our 320/737-900 rates as of now are horribly low and no arbitrator will award them. They will award industry standard at the minimum.

In fairness to Sailing, I tend to agree the whole 321 rate issue is pretty much a tempest in teapot.

We have a 737-900 rate - this is the reasonable absolute lowest the 321 rate will be.

We have a 757 rate - this is probably the reasonable highest the 321 rate will be.

Once we get a TA the 321 rate will obviously increase proportionately. ***

Its only a few dollars difference from the low to the high and our guys will get Retro pay. So if you are arguing about the $ - there is not much here,

I do agree with arguing the principal of our PWA and we have to vigorously defend it against every possible management violation because we don't want to start setting bad precedents, but when a third party is involved it gets a little messy - exactly the situation we are in now.

*** To be clear I think the rate in between the 737-900 and the 757 will be much too low until it is adjusted upward with a TA. But I do not think we will get a rate higher than the 757 - maybe that is what is holding up the issue.

Scoop

I am smart enough to know this is out of both Union and management control. The arbitrator has held the hearings. The company and union met their obligations. We can't enforce a timeline on the Arbitrator. To try and do so certainly would not help our position.

I think it's political. The lack of a decision is due to the negotiation. This issue needs to be settled. Where and when the TA moves the 321 rate is likely not going to be satisfactory either. The pilot group deserves a timely resolution because this is the precedent for the A350 and CS100 going forward absent a TA. We better get market rates for those BTW.

Our current vastly expired and surpassed rates you mentioned are irrelevant. The arbitrator will look incredibly biased if they don't give us current industry standard for those rates you mentioned. Delta dot.

Even a reasonably decent lawyer would remind you to read the entire section of the contract that pertains to the questions that have been raised here regarding when the decision should be rendered and what the final rate should be.

If you do, you will discover that there is no issue here.

Sections 3 E.1-3 steps were completed. The company gave notice of the new aircraft model, the parties met to negotiate a rate and they could not agree, therefore, they began the process of determining the new aircraft model pay rate by establishing a Five Member System Board of Adjustment.

3 E.4 provides parameters to consider when attempting to determine the rate of pay for the new aircraft model.

3 E.5 allows the company to establish an interim rate. They did that. It is being paid at the 739 rate until the System Board determines the actual rate.

3 E.6 states that the pilots will train and fly the aircraft without regard to the length of time it takes to complete the process. This is why there is no deadline on the arbitrator's decision.

3 E.7 determines the starting point for the new aircraft model pay rate. In other words, retro pay should the decision be to pay a rate higher than the 739, in this case.

IMO, the arbitrator wouldn't be looking to establish a particular number of dollars per hour, which some have suggested here. He would likely be deciding between the two parties stated arguments as to whether it should be paid at the 739 rate (Delta) or the 7ER rate (ALPA).

Again, IMO, it is likely that he will address the question in terms relative to how other US carriers pay the A321. Our competitive set is UAL and AMR. They pay band the A321 with both the 739 and the A320. UAL also bands the 757 with the A321, where AMR pays a higher rate for the 757. Since Delta does not pay band the A320/739/757(ER) together, the arbitrator will decide which rate to match.

One other consideration could be what pay rate other US carriers use for the A321. Several smaller carriers (Frontier, Jet Blue, Spirit) pay the same rate as the A320. However, I doubt that the final decision would be less than the rate that the parties were asking of the arbitrator during the System Board.

Ok. So again, when? How long is an acceptable delay? "within 60 days" IS the language.

It says the system board will render a decision. Didn't they do that when they deadlocked. Regardless telling the arbitration that we demand he render a decision ASAP would be beyond stupid.