Airline Pilot Central Forums - DAL In-House Union?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)

- - DAL In-House Union? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/36867-dal-house-union.html)

I am glad that you see it this way Check.
I just do not get how people can see it any other way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 557755)

That argument doesn't work for me. That's DALPA spin.
Those six seats are critical because they are on the BIGGER airframes.
If it was putting 6 more seats on 50 or 70 seaters then that would be one thing, but this is allowing 26 more 76 seat airplanes.

26 additional 76 seat airplanes are now allowed under our scope clause.

It's far worse than that - ~10 of the newly allowed 76 seat CRJ900's were not yet delivered. By digging in we could have forced those airframes to be configured with 70 seats making that airframe much less economically viable - we ****ed some serious leverage away.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 557487)

There is no solution that does not erode mainline flying in either quantity or pay in the name of "fair".

Feeder carriers need their own union, Mainline theirs.

Two seperate unions zealously pursuing their own narrow interests will ultimately serve the interests of the employers more than the pilots. It will be whipsaw on a grand scale.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fly4hire (Post 557642)

...no one has ever shown me the alchemy of how it will work - the career progression at the regional involves taking it out of the growth of the mainline unless you define career progression as moving up to the mainline. Most of the younger dudes want that, however the senior pilots controlling the regional MEC's are lifers and want that growth and career progression in the form of more and larger airplanes at their regional.

I do define career progression for regional pilots as moving to the majors. I did not attend Hogwarts, but I will take a stab at some alchemy.

Major pilot groups and their affiliated regional pilot groups should negotiate common agreements with employers. These agreements should allow for true "flow up" and "flow back", rigid scope clauses with the line at 70 seat jets and the placement of regional pilots on major seniority lists. Pay rates for CL70/90/100 and E170/190 sized aircraft should be set between current regional and major pay rates with these aircraft flown by mainline pilots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FedElta (Post 557719)

My last Alpa carrier had member ratification for all ta's, loa's, and miscellaneous agreements with the company. That would have prevented the last grievance settlement at Delta without discussion and member vote......can member ratification be adopted at Delta?

I agree completely. If a vote by the members were required for all LOA's we would be discussing a PROPOSED LOA and not a SIGNED LOA. Big difference.

And it would have never passed.

Exactly :) So what we need to be discussing is: instead of replacing members of the LEC/MEC (or the entire union for that matter), we need to change the DALPA by-laws to require a vote by the members to ratify any LOA's. Therefore, it wouldn't matter what kind of agreements they reach with the company; if the pilots don't like them, they don't get passed.

I smell a resolution at an upcoming LEC meeting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dash8widget (Post 557792)

Nice idea but wouldn't have mattered in this instance. This was a grievance resolution not a LOA, correct? The GC came up with the solution and the MEC Chair approved it. Do you want a MEMRAT for every decision the MEC makes? That is a recipe for anarchy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 557799)

I smell a resolution at an upcoming LEC meeting.

But maybe it is time to get solutions in stead of resolutions? Something that very well can be obtained by DCU (Delta Crew Union). FA's and Pilots combined we would be a pretty significant group fighting for the best outcome for our company, our crewmembers, and our benefits / compensations..

Just a thought..

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingViking (Post 557869)

Interesting Viking. I was just thinking the same thing earlier. If we were to form our own union, wouldn't it be a good idea to offer membership in the new union to our Flight Attendants? Now that would be a voice of roughly 25,000. What are the benefits, downsides, and limitations?