Delta MEC suggestion for the Junior Folks
 

As I understand it, typical votes, on any issues at DAL get very few actual votes. If this is the case, all of the junior guys and gals here at DAL, including FNWA, should seriously consider a grass roots effort to vote as a block for our "party". We seriously need to get representation on the LEC's that are JUNIOR FO's. Not FO's that are senior enough to be captains anyway.

If we get a couple thousand guys and gals to vote for people who actually represent our wishes, we at least can be assured that they will, at a minimum, vote in their own best interest. This will of course be in the interest of those of their peer group.

I suggest that we begin to vote in "our people". That would be junior FO's into every position that does not specifically require a Captain. We could effectively Influence the MEC by using the normal democratic processes in place.

Do not get me wrong. I am not a union hater. On the contrary, I am a strong union supporter. Nevertheless, I do not feel that on this issue the MEC represented MY interest, nor that of my peer group.

For the Record, I am a DAL 7er FO hired in 07. I consider my Peer group to be those of us at the New Delta in the bottom several thousand of the list.

I am very interested in the opinions from both sides of the family on my suggestion.

Slinky

In 2000 the apathy of the junior vote at US Airways was overwhelming. Scope and other provisions that negatively impacted junior pilots were being voted upon every day.

So we started a little group called "A Unified Front". Printed 500 bag tags that said, "Protect the 1149", started a website, and got the largest turnout of junior pilots at a Philly MEC meeting in years.

You have to campaign for your peer-group. It takes some communication, some drive, and good organizational skills, but it helps.

Great idea, but it will be quite hard to get the my generation to do anything that is not totally about them.
This needs to come from across the board. If junior guys think they can come in and call all of the shots they will get slapped real hard, and not just by the people in the union.
I agree that something needs to be done, but the quickest way to pi$$ off half to this group is to be told what and how to do it by a junior guy.

Maybe, but then again a pretty quick way to **** off a bunch of guys at the bottom is to make decisions that get them furloughed, displaced, force them to commute or just pushed down to reserve. Is our quality of life and job security worth less because of our seniority number? If someone answers yes to this question, then I really do not care if they don't like me.

It must be stated that ALPA is a democratic organization. We elect or representation. If enough people feel threatened to elect people who they feel share their fortunes, by being near to their seniority, then they can at least be assured that these people will accurately represent their wishes.

It is likely that this will not "take over" the MEC. But it could, at the very least, act as a surge damper.

Or I could be wrong....

Discuss

I agree that pilots on the bottom 20% need to be in electable positions. To make the changes that the majority, who vote and nothing else, would like to see, it needs to be a cross section of the group. Not weighted to far junior or senior. That way all voices get heard.

As you know, the quickest way to irritate someone is to be junior and whining about something. They see it as your duty to sit down and be quiet.
I agree that that is BS, but it is also reality. That is why having a guy with a really low seniority number saying the same thing as a guy that has a high one, adds credibility to the argument.

Block reps?

folks, you need to get involved. I remember when I went to the LEC meeting here in ATL, when there was a recall motion on the LEC reps. I was amazed at how few people were there. The reps were able to stack the room with their buddies and avoided recall. Things like this give Moak all the ammo he needs to do whatever he wants on the negotiating table. Get involved. Go to LEC meetings. Call everyday and tell the duty pilot how ****ed you are. VOTE! As long as the Moak administration is running the union, there will be more scope givebacks.

You know the part I don't understand?

Why is anyone surprised when the contract they voted for is being executed as it is written?

The time to be involved is when your contract bargaining committee is at the table, not a year after the fact.

I wrote on this board that we should not vote for the JPWA because the scope stunk and we could do better while the Company was in wheel and deal mode.

As a group we must return to ALPA's core beliefs.

We also must convince our leadership that we are a representative organization. Our Reps and our MEC's job is to represent their pilots. This is not a top down organization, it gets its power from the bottom up.

Junior half: ACL is exactly right here. I would slap down any such effort to attempt a takeover based on half the seniority list.

The problem at DALPA right now is that the democratic foundation of our union is being perverted by a dictator. If the system was working, all parts of the list would be represented. That's why we have FO reps, Capt reps and reps from all bases. This by definition makes the representation disparate across the pilot group. But here's the problem: none of that matters if everything is run by the personality cult of one man.

The LEC needs to recall the current chairman and replace him with a person committed to aggressively stating and pursuing the majority view of the MEC. That single step will produce a better union that is closer to the hearts and minds of the pilot group.

Carl

Carl,

The election was a month ago and there was only one candidate. If there was some subversion of the process, couldn't the MEC have found one other person to run? What about you? Sounds like you have some beef with Lee but that doesn't seem to be the case with the people that elected him. The same people that elected him are the same people that would recall him a month later, does that make any sense at all to you? You just sound like a guy with sour grapes about something.

That is why the LEC's need to be recalled to have a recall work.
It it is what you want, learn what you have to do to make it happen.

My beef with Lee is as follows:

1. He was quoted in numerous publications that he would not run for an additional term as MEC chair after the merger's DCC. He said if he were drafted, he would refuse to serve.

2. All the early indications are that his personal view of RJ's being good for Delta Airlines are what won the day. Even though the Chairman has no vote, his cult of personality won the day. THAT is a subversion of the democratic process created by ALPA.

Even if I agreed with Lee's position (which I do not), you can't have a one man show. It is too risky.

This is my beef with Lee. Any other questions?

Carl

Here is one for ya.

I have been getting a few indications that RJDC is seeing LOA 2006-10 as an infraction on its agreement with ALPA. RJDC's beef is that this LOA pertained to only its original signatory's. (NWA-DAL-CPA and Mesaba) Fact is that due to the fact that this LOA now applies to all DCI carrier is very important to all Delta pilots. As we are shrinking we need to realize that this now affords our pilots the ability through our CBA to have rights at other carriers. It was not unintentional.
What we need to do is make sure that our MEC and CNC do not sign a MOA with the RJDC and company that it only includes these carriers. If they do that it is only a further erosion of our CBA rites. I urge all of you to contract our representation and tell them what the importance of this NWA LOA 2006-10 is to all of us.

Show me those quotes. Even if true, so what? If the MEC wanted to get another Chairman they could have voted for someone else.

Show me those quotes. I hear a lot of second hand stuff about a guy who told a guy but nothing that ever has been written down. What you call a cult of personality, I call an election. It seems that people that lose an election always find a way to diminish the outcome by attacking those who voted differently than them. Do you really think all the MEC members are so brainwashed that they couldn't find someone else? Again, why didn't you run?

There is not a one man show. In fact, Lee is famous for finding people that disagree with him and bringing them into the MEC administration. Do you have any first hand experience with his work as MEC Chairman to back up your accusations or are you just shooting from the hip? It easy to make a public smear, it is more difficult to back it up with facts.

Well, it's probably a waste of time when you say: "where's the quote" then say "even if it's true, so what?" But here goes:

The first quote I read was from Lee printed in the AJC. He was on a bird hunting trip with a buddy, and he said the buddy asked if he would run again. His response was what I stated previously. That's where I first read it. I saw it since in previous emails. But I'm sure you'll say the AJC was lying and or the emails were misquotes.

I don't have quotes for this. It was the impression of my NWA contacts that witnessed the way Lee handled negotiations with the JCBA, and merger. In both cases, they were amazed at the way the other committee members were silent in the face of the MEC Chairman. Especially since the MEC Chairman was not even a member of either the negotiating committee or the merger committee. It was very clear to our side who was running the show.

Show me your quotes!!!! ;)

I've never met Lee, so I have no first hand experience of him. What I've written above is what I have to back up what I think. It explains how such a horrific judgement such as the scope cave-in could have happened. Especially since Lee is quoted as saying: "RJ's are good for Delta Airlines."

By the way, I would run if people really wanted me to. But I'm an old fart, and this is not rocket science. All you need is a person committed to the vigorous pursuit of the MEC's majority opinion. The person should be articulate, a great public speaker, and IMO, younger than me.

Carl

Careful. You're dangerously close to the real reason for Moak's cave-in on scope as well.
An ALPA National agenda. RJ drivers are the future.
Moak wants Prater's job.
2 + 2

Hmmmmmm........

Carl

I know and I know what is going on with this. I want it out there so people can e-mail their reps and make it well known that under no circumstances is scope or these LOA's for sale.

Well, I see two options:

1)Moak is out. I vote YES.

2)ALPA is out.

If we don't take action NOW, our jobs will continue to be outsourced. ALPA continues to support regionals, and it's a conflict of interest. ALPA cannot protect the career interests of mainline pilots & regional pilots. It clearly not working.

If its not a one man show then why were Reps not briefed on the matter until it was too late to give an input? That's a fact. I talked to my reps.

That is absolutely correct.

Carl

Dead on!! Time for a revolution! APA has the highest rates and scope is pretty secure (or better than most). They have it right! We need a group that represents OUR pilot group if we ever want to see changes!

I agree, but isn't the camel's nose (and tail, for that matter) already under the tent? Your only options would be to a) kick all the regionals out of ALPA or b) start a new union and don't invite any regionals to join. I think the single seniority list would be a good idea too, but it ain't gonna happen either. Not to mention ALPA is really all about being shown the $$, so fewer members would be counterproductive to their agenda.

Hypothetical
 

What happens if we do vote in a pretty junior person and worese comes to worse and he/she is furloughed?

ALPA suppports regionals... ALPA supports Majors, I don't think either is true. ALPA supports making more money for ALPA. A fake union that charges real money.

They keep working at ALPA during the furlough. The two are not linked.

Even more reason to possibly say bye bye. They have more concern for themselves then for their members.

... and did we forget ALPA's attempt to collect dues money on our 401K / Retirement? Fortunately that got killed by the BOD, as it should have.

That is incorrect. It happened during our last furlough. We had FO reps that ended up furloughed and they had to be replaced since they were no longer active seniority list pilots flying the line.

Carl and ACL and Superpilot and Bucking and the rest:

I understand you are upset about this scope and some of you are single issue people so there won't be a meeting of the minds. I would just like to see if you could step back for one second and attempt to take one snapshot of a strategic picture and not get lost in the weeds.

Where should the Delta and Northwest pilots be right now? By all rights we should be at each others throats, fighting about contracts, seniority, furlough, and all of the rest that goes along with a typical merger (for historic examples see Republic-Northwest and US Air-America West). We should be scrounging along with our bankruptcy contracts with no hope for any gains at least until the recession ends or the contracts become amendable whichever occurs last. We should not have any stock from the merger and we should be complaining because the executives were the only ones who got stock.

Instead of having a single MEC working together, we should have two separate MEC's fighting with each other, maybe we would be whipsawing each other for concessions to avoid furloughs in the downturn. Delta would not be able to fully take advantage of the merger benefits, so there would be more losses, less flying, and less need for pilots. We should be setting ourselves up for 15-20 more years of hatred and infighting so we can be just like Red Book - Green Book (please don't tell us you were just one big happy family, we have seen too much to believe that story any more).

So why aren't we there? What we can all see from the arbitration transcripts is that the whole idea was Lee Moak's. Not Dave Stevens, who tried to take credit, not John Prater who tried to take credit, the entire idea was Lee's. Get involved up front, get stock, get contract benefits, get the seniority list done early, get the MEC's merged early, get working together so the merger benefited pilots and not just shareholders and senior management.

Lest you forget, this has NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE in the history of labor and mergers. Never. Any industry, any labor group. It is easy to forget how ground breaking this was because it is all old hat now, as if this were the standard path. Think of this evolution:

1. Talking to senior management to get them on board
2. Going to the Board of Directors to introduce them to the idea
3. Going directly to the major shareholders to talk them into supporting the idea
4. Going back to the Board of Directors to seal the deal

Think about how that happened and let me know if there isn't something in there that impresses you. Could you have done it? Could you have even thought it up? Imagine during each step when the guys sitting on the other side of the table said "You want to do WHAT? Are you crazy?" Remember these are the people who own and run the company.

The idea was so new and different, that the hardest people to get on board were the Northwest MEC members. They were constantly threatening to scuttle the process.

Not only that, but Lee and the MEC had to keep the Delta pilots on board throughout the process. Just think, rather than come in with outrageous seniority proposals, the Delta MEC started with a list almost identical to the one produced by three arbitrators months later. That just isn't done, you have to be unreasonable in these things. Contractual benefits that went disproportionately to one group, full pay parity on day one.

As we traveled down the bumpy road, all along the way, there was opportunity after opportunity to blow things up. Just look at the way the Northwest MEC and their administration handled things. They couldn't even tell the truth to their own pilots. Think about LOA 19. Shouldn't the Delta pilots have just left the Northwest pilots hanging out in the wind? Isn't that the history of these things. What kind of leadership and vision does it take to avoid that? How about the most recent elections. Couldn't the Delta MEC have just taken all the officer positions and left the Northwest pilots out in the cold?

Think of the recent history of airline mergers and tell me how they have gone. Have the US Airways pilots even gotten $0.01 cent of a raise since their 2005 bankruptcy contract? What is Captain Sully making right now? Think of the vision, the effort, the leadership that went into get billions, yes that is billions, of benefits for the Delta pilots (and I mean all 12,400) when everything pointed to us getting nothing but a giant ****ing contest.

So after all these things that have brought job security, contractual improvements, retirement improvements, Delta stock to go into retirement accounts, and the mere fact that we are not fighting each other now, it comes down to these 76 seat jets.

Let's examine the issue. We have about 25 jets getting an additional 6 seats. (you know that they could be operated with 70 seats with no changes to the contract, right?). 25 times 6 is 150. That means we are talking about the lift capacity of one A-320. 12 jobs for mainline. If you think the option B would be to buy 25 737-700's or Embraer 190's then you are just dreaming.

Am I happy about this? No, but I long ago learned that world doesn't care that much about my happiness so I have learned to live with the fact that sometimes I will be disappointed.

So either these 150 seats are a big deal or they aren't. If they are a big deal, then the furlough protection for those 400 junior pilots means something. If it's a big deal, then the company would not want to lose it, right?

If it's not a big deal then what are we talking about.

As I said before, I don't even hope to talk you down from the ledge. If you can't at least acknowledge the leadership and vision that it took to get us all where we are today, crying about these 76 seat jets when virtually every other pilot group is facing massive furloughs and retrenching, then there isn't much more to say. Try for a second to think of the strategic position we are in today versus where all of history, all conventions, all rights that point to a much worse position.

How did we get here?

Hear, Hear!

Alfaromeo,

It takes two to tango. Moak did NOT do it all. It was a TEAM effort. And to be honest, Moak was the lesser of 2 evils. It was him or Stevens. Don't put him on a pedestal as if he is a hero.

In regards to this entire issue, it's the principle. Not only did he exclude the rest of the union, he has yet to provide an explanation as to WHY he was a Lone Ranger on the deal. I agree that so far this merger is the poster child for future mergers, and that we could be in a much worse situation. But we have a HUGE battle approaching because management says there is not a viable replacement for the DC9, and appears as if they are in NO hurry to find one. This will start soon, as its likely the new DAL will not invest into the DC9s to keep them flying. So we need a leader who we know without a doubt is going to fight for scope. Several people on this board had Moak personally tell them RJs at regionals are good for Delta. So will he hold the line at 76? Will he PROTECT the careers, upgrades, earnings, QOL, and jobs for ALL Delta pilots? Or will he indirectly support regional guys in order to obtain votes for Prater's job? Will he only protect the WBs? And if he rolls over on the NBs, what's to say he won't roll over on the WBs?

I'm trying to see this from your point of view, and in a way I see how this latest agreement could have been worse. But I need reassurance that this Scope relaxation is not indicative of the future.

I agree, that there took a lot of vision from the MEC to get where we are today. I do not discount that at all. That is why I am not asking for a new union. Read my posts and realize that I am very upset at what just transpired this last few months with one issue. Scope.
I am far from single minded when it comes to the issues of the union. I am involved. I have long said that if you want to complain, you need to be involved.
I take great issue with how this last one was handled. That is all. I have stated that scope is not for sale. It irritates me to no end to see this happening again and again. I am also stated that the membership is to blame. We continue to pass LOA's, and PWA's with scope relief in it. I also blame the MEC leadership. We as a group need to change the way it does business. I am one who strongly disagrees that an in house union is better.

Do we have proof of this other than anecdotal comments made that are residual misunderstanding about the cycle limit on the DC9 from the SLI hearings where DALPA was trying everything they could to diminish the role of the DC and those who flew them?

We are getting mixed signals on the future of the DC9 (other than of course it will be eventfully replaced). The cycle out by 2012 issue is a red herring, where the real factor is Navaid compliance and the 88's have the identical issue. So even if they don't invest most are still good to 2012 assuming the navaid requirements are not slid

OK, so MD90 and possibly 717 may be used as a MD88, but not DC9 replacement? If this is the case it will still be post SOC so will effect everyone as pilots would displace off of the DC9 into what their seniority can hold. All the 717/MD90 available will not replace even the current 88 fleet.

The DC9 is ~1400 pilot jobs at DAL staffing formulas - as much as dislike this 76 seat deal, I find it hard to believe those jobs, together with another ~3000 MD jobs are for sale to 76 seat encroachment.

Conspiracies are fun, but show me some proof of this other than this 76 seat grievance settlement.

For you DALPA guys, check out the "Scope- 76 seat jets" thread on the DALPA forum. The author gives a good sober analysis of the contract language and the grievance.

I am not sure what you mean by a red herring at the hearings. Dalpa simply produced the cycles on the airframes and the required inspections to keep them flying. 104,000 Cycles is a key economic point where major bucks are required to refurb the aircraft. Management has stated they will not make that investment. As far as staffing on the nines Delta's formula requires about 11 pilots per narrow body airframe. I have no idea where the 1400 number you quote came from . With about 60 nines left the staffing would be around 660 pilots. There are no navaid issues with the MD-88's. They have a totally different suite then the DC-9's. All Delta's MD-88's have LNAV and INS with a glass map display and meet all future area nav requirements. They will not however be able to conduct RNAV/RNP approaches. Thats not a concern for at least 12 more years. Anderson gave a briefing last week to the MEC on the fleet plans. Sadly for both former NWA and Delta pilots the news what not good. If they can't reach a deal on the MD-90's things might get ugly. Here is a article on the nines with a interview with NWA DC-9 manager in 1998 copied from the Dalpa forum.

LONDON - A detailed structural safety analysis was conducted before Northwest Airlines [NWAC] decided to keep flying its DC-9 fleet another 15 years. The carrier operates a fleet of 173 DC-9s.
Northwest plans to fly these airplanes to the year 2010. Upon retirement, the planes will have accumulated 40 years of service.
Speaking at an aging airliner conference here, Brad Mueller, Northwest's manager of fleet planning, said the DC-9 was a perfect fit for routes it was flying. The question was whether the airplane's structure could be flown to 100,000 flight cycles or more.
"Douglas had tested the airplane to more than 200,000 cycles," Mueller explained. At the time Northwest decided to invest about $10 million per plane for hushkits, new interiors, and other upgrades, Mueller said Northwest's DC-9's had logged about 65,000-70,000 cycles.
The manufacturer's extended fatigue testing verified the durability of the design. "This was the single biggest concern," Mueller said. "If the study had not satisfied the question (of structural safety), we wouldn't have done it."
Northwest plans to fly its DC-9's to about 100,000 cycles, at which point they will be retired. "Major modifications are needed at 104,000 cycles," Mueller explained.
Each airplane received a complete, $1 million new interior.
Mueller explained, "Customers associate what they can see, touch and feel as evidence of a well-maintained and safe airplane

Once again, so much of what you post is utter Bullsh!t. You've always hated NWA, the pilots and the former union leaders. We know that alfaromeo...it's nothing new.

However, your slobbering love affair with Lee Moak speaks volumes. It is exactly my point. It is the same slobbering love affair amongst the LEC's toward Mr. Moak that put us in this issue of caving on scope. Our union is not set up for one man shows. It is supposed to be a democratic process. That is critical, because you never know when/if your dictator/one man show could sell you down the river. If there's no checks and balances, you're in trouble.

Let me break it down for you: Even if Lee is all wise, all knowing and all omnipotent, I WOULD RATHER HAVE A DEMOCRATICALLY DERIVED SOLUTION EVEN IF IT IS WORSE! Yes...even if it's worse than the perfect solutions that are always derived by Moak.

We are a democratic union. What is there about that you don't get?

Carl

He is exactly right. The scope change is irrelevant. The decision of Moak and a couple of others to make this change without the direction of the MEC is scary.

Heyas Sailing,

That article referenced a cycle rate equivalent to 1998 utilization, which dropped significantly post 2001. NWA's own internal documents show airframe life well beyond 2012.

Nu

Correct. As a matter of fact, the last DC9 was scheduled to leave the NWA Fleet AFTER 2020! That DID take into account the expensive rear pressure bulkhead replacement that they opted not to do.