DAL In-House Union?
#32
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
From: Left, left, left right left....
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.
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.
#33
...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.
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.
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: SLC ERB
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.
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: SLC ERB
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.
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.
#38
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.
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.
#39
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..
Just a thought..
#40
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..
Just a thought..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



