acl65pilot

I understand the angst with that. It is part of BP-5. It cannot be done over night. If you look at how your bids are going they are slowly getting towards required staffing.

Superdad

Forgive me for not reading the whole thread, am I to understand that Moak made this agreement on his own?

sailingfun

We have a group at Dalpa who monitor contract comliance. The company had ordered a number of DCI aircraft last year as we all know. At the time the company ordered the aircraft they were in compliance with our interuptation of the scope clause. With the company parking 320's and 757's by postponing overhauls they fell out of comliance using our numbers. A grievance was filed by DALPA. The company responded that their interuption of the numbers was different and they felt the 6 extra seats in 19 airframes were legal. There was nevery any question the aircraft were legal the only dispute was the number of seats.
Standard practice in any grievance is to try and reach a negotiated settlement. The grievance committee reached a settlement with management on 6 Feb. The Chairman who is Lee Moak approved the settlement. No contractual language was changed in the settlement. The company agreed to use our numbers going forward which is very important. We gave the company the right to keep the 6 seats in the aircraft they have ordered which was not so good. We also got some minimal furlough protection for 400 new hires.

sailingfun

The company was allowed a phase in period that is written into the contract. The NWA pilot monthly bid has shown the company is training additional captains. So far there is no reason to believe the company is not in compliance.

Superpilot92

this reminds me of a story of the guy whom is happily married, all he talks about is how wonderful his wife is and how she can do no wrong, all the while behind the scenes she is running around on him with his boss.

This is alot more to this story it appears and bottom line is we have a MEC who wont set the precedent to management that further scope relief is non-negotiable. We have a battle coming with the dc9s and their replacements and we need to send a clear message to mgmt that that flying is staying on our list.

acl65pilot

400 New hires???

I ask again. Is it for all new hires or is it only good after SOC??

400 is not everyone protected under the previous no furlough on the seat scope trigger.

Superpilot92

he is quick to respond when he is pushing the moak bandwagon but not when you ask questions regarding the contents of the bandwagon.

smitty145

ACL,
I'm not looking at the seniority list. But the previous furlough protection was for a September 2001 hire date. Does that cover both groups, and if so, how many guys junior to the NWA guy that has that hire date? That may be where the 400 # is coming from. This is my WAG as to "The 400". They are Sparta!

acl65pilot

The 400 as they have said are the NWA and DAL new hires that do not have any pre 9-11 NWA guys slotted in with them. There are about 500 DAL guys that got slotted in with NWA guys hired pre 9-11.

The reason I ask, is if they are touting 400, it sounds like there is something that we are missing. That or they are missing the fact that the Company was given the ability to furlough of the pre merger list prior to SOC. If we needed to do that, there are about 700 on the DAL list and 200 or so on the NWA list.
The reason I bring this up is, as always the devil is in the details.

Tomcat

H--L Yea Cuz!!!!!! I knew I'd like having the NWA guys on property. Good job Wagman. I'm late coming into the thread, but when will our union hear our voices? Not just NO!!!!!!! But H__L NO!!!!!!!! We have not had the fortitude as the old Delta Guys to protect our jobs, so I hope the New Boyz on the street can put a little fire in our bellies.

Thank you for at least making your voice heard. I thought I was the only one that kept hitting my Reps on Scope!!!!

V/R Tomcat

LAX 73NB
Furloughed 2002-2005