DAL AIP passed 50% +1
01-13-2023, 05:05 PM
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
DAL AIP passed 50% +1
I hear a lot of cheerleaders on the Delta AIP by a bunch of FedEx pilots who haven’t seen a single word of the agreement. We have only seen a few bullet points and NO language.
I was just informed by a couple DAL bros it only passed the union by a 9-8 vote. So if this agreement is so great, as many on APC and JetFlyers are saying, then why the nail bitter vote by the individuals who have actually seen the details?
I was just informed by a couple DAL bros it only passed the union by a 9-8 vote. So if this agreement is so great, as many on APC and JetFlyers are saying, then why the nail bitter vote by the individuals who have actually seen the details?
01-13-2023, 05:09 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Position: NYC 7ERA
Posts: 1,967
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
I hear a lot of cheerleaders on the Delta AIP by a bunch of FedEx pilots who haven’t seen a single word of the agreement. We have only seen a few bullet points and NO language.
I was just informed by a couple DAL bros it only passed the union by a 9-8 vote. So if this agreement is so great, as many on APC and JetFlyers are saying then why the nail bitter vote by the individuals who have actually seen the details?
I was just informed by a couple DAL bros it only passed the union by a 9-8 vote. So if this agreement is so great, as many on APC and JetFlyers are saying then why the nail bitter vote by the individuals who have actually seen the details?
This time it was the MBCBP, Market Based Cash Balance Plan, where all excess 401k contributions would go, but it had a $300k min balance at retirement.. So guys retiring in the next 5 would get handed anywhere from $250-300k in an investment account while locking the rest of in a subpar submarket performing system.
01-13-2023, 05:38 PM
#3
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by CX500T
Because we have more than a few reps (and one entire council) that would vote no on $1000 an hour, a free unicorn and positive space commuting contract if they didn't get their most recent pension restoration under a different name (at expense of scope or something else that doesn't affect the retiring in 2-5 years crowd) scheme.
This time it was the MBCBP, Market Based Cash Balance Plan, where all excess 401k contributions would go, but it had a $300k min balance at retirement.. So guys retiring in the next 5 would get handed anywhere from $250-300k in an investment account while locking the rest of in a subpar submarket performing system.
This time it was the MBCBP, Market Based Cash Balance Plan, where all excess 401k contributions would go, but it had a $300k min balance at retirement.. So guys retiring in the next 5 would get handed anywhere from $250-300k in an investment account while locking the rest of in a subpar submarket performing system.
Last edited by Noworkallplay; 01-13-2023 at 05:56 PM.
01-13-2023, 06:08 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: Two Wheeler FrontSeat
Posts: 1,162
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
That can’t be the singular reason all 8 voted NO. Some of those voting No were not senior nor expecting pension restoration. My buds sent me the council comms from numerous councils. It sounds like the actual contract language adds much more to the story than the few bullet points. Language comes out January 16th correct?
01-13-2023, 06:40 PM
#5
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by StarClipper
Are you always this way man? How and why would deny the information someone on property is sharing with you. Do you always have all the answers?
Like I said, I was sent numerous of the DAL council communications and the reasons were much more than retirement. A 9-8 vote over 1 item just isn’t factual based on the council communications. I won’t post those communications on a public forum, but I would definitely ask your DAL buds for them. The bigger point is the narrow support it gained and the language that’s actually behind those bullet points. Yet many FedEx cheerleaders are gleaming with joy on something they haven’t even seen. The same crowd pumping it as the next best thing because of a single payrate and a few bullet points. This same crowd chastised the previous 2015 contract at FDX that barely passed yet a 50% +1 vote at DAL is a huge win. Talk about hypocrisy.
01-13-2023, 07:29 PM
#6
Can’t find crew pickup
Joined APC: Jun 2021
Posts: 1,985
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
Like I said, I was sent numerous of the DAL council communications and the reasons were much more than retirement. A 9-8 vote over 1 item just isn’t factual based on the council communications. I won’t post those communications on a public forum, but I would definitely ask your DAL buds for them. The bigger point is the narrow support it gained and the language that’s actually behind those bullet points. Yet many FedEx cheerleaders are gleaming with joy on something they haven’t even seen. The same crowd pumping it as the next best thing because of a single payrate and a few bullet points. This same crowd chastised the previous 2015 contract at FDX that barely passed yet a 50% +1 vote at DAL is a huge win. Talk about hypocrisy.
And let’s not forget that the NYC CA rep that voted against the LOA that prevented furloughs (NYC being the most junior base) and added a lot of contractual gains lost his MEC chair bid when the NYC FO rep voted against him (lost 9-8, see the trend). Then the CA rep immediately tried to have him recalled (it failed).
Our MEC has factions it seems, just like DC. And just like lots of people on here, no matter what you say, nothing is going to change their mind.
01-13-2023, 07:37 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: Two Wheeler FrontSeat
Posts: 1,162
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
Like I said, I was sent numerous of the DAL council communications and the reasons were much more than retirement. A 9-8 vote over 1 item just isn’t factual based on the council communications. I won’t post those communications on a public forum, but I would definitely ask your DAL buds for them. The bigger point is the narrow support it gained and the language that’s actually behind those bullet points. Yet many FedEx cheerleaders are gleaming with joy on something they haven’t even seen. The same crowd pumping it as the next best thing because of a single payrate and a few bullet points. This same crowd chastised the previous 2015 contract at FDX that barely passed yet a 50% +1 vote at DAL is a huge win. Talk about hypocrisy.
01-14-2023, 04:08 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 795
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
I hear a lot of cheerleaders on the Delta AIP by a bunch of FedEx pilots who haven’t seen a single word of the agreement. We have only seen a few bullet points and NO language.
I was just informed by a couple DAL bros it only passed the union by a 9-8 vote. So if this agreement is so great, as many on APC and JetFlyers are saying, then why the nail bitter vote by the individuals who have actually seen the details?
I was just informed by a couple DAL bros it only passed the union by a 9-8 vote. So if this agreement is so great, as many on APC and JetFlyers are saying, then why the nail bitter vote by the individuals who have actually seen the details?
01-14-2023, 05:10 AM
#9
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by StarClipper
Dude what are you talking about? First of all, the Delta TA isn’t out for vote yet, 50%+1 is not the crew force vote. Secondly, nobody said everything in their TA is better. We are only looking to improve the areas where we lag and pay happens to be one of them. We also state that they didn’t have any concessions in there and any CONCESSION in our TA will be an automatic NO VOTE. I will attempt to read the entire TA, however the first CONCESSION I come across, will be where my reading ends and my NO VOTED decided.
Two of the reps letters at DAL suggest areas in which DAL ALPA worked with the company. They were framed as win/win or neutral. I would be cautious in what you determine “No Concessions” to mean in others contracts. From the DAL reps letters their are multiple areas they changed things to address company concerns.
01-14-2023, 05:21 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: Two Wheeler FrontSeat
Posts: 1,162
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
I never said crew force vote. It was the union rep vote to move to a TA. This is almost identical to our CBA in 2015 when it marginally passed the MEC. Yet our loud screamers on social media frame it in a completely different manner.
Two of the reps letters at DAL suggest areas in which DAL ALPA worked with the company. They were framed as win/win or neutral. I would be cautious in what you determine “No Concessions” to mean in others contracts. From the DAL reps letters there are multiple areas they changed things to address company concerns.
Two of the reps letters at DAL suggest areas in which DAL ALPA worked with the company. They were framed as win/win or neutral. I would be cautious in what you determine “No Concessions” to mean in others contracts. From the DAL reps letters there are multiple areas they changed things to address company concerns.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
