Lee Moak's stance on scope and unity.
10-12-2009, 06:03 AM
#31
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
Since the point of this thread is about Chairman Lee Moak - did anyone consider he had a nearly perfect record for ALPA President, until this vote?
Prater lost US Air on his watch. Shade it any way you want, but it reduced ALPA's power and further shifted the center of the remaining representational structure towards the small jet F4D carriers.
In contrast, Moak held Delta and NWA together (with help, but he was the guy in the spotlight and he did an excellent job), Moak secured contractual gains during record high fuel prices and the beginnings of a financial meltdown, he kept management focused on pilot's interests during a change in Command at Delta and kept pilots relevant throughout the process.
He has got one terrific record based on objective results.
This Compass (tactical retreat) puts a stain (although just a little one) on an outstanding record.
Prater lost US Air on his watch. Shade it any way you want, but it reduced ALPA's power and further shifted the center of the remaining representational structure towards the small jet F4D carriers.
In contrast, Moak held Delta and NWA together (with help, but he was the guy in the spotlight and he did an excellent job), Moak secured contractual gains during record high fuel prices and the beginnings of a financial meltdown, he kept management focused on pilot's interests during a change in Command at Delta and kept pilots relevant throughout the process.
He has got one terrific record based on objective results.
This Compass (tactical retreat) puts a stain (although just a little one) on an outstanding record.
10-12-2009, 06:04 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Slow:
Then how about our waiver to ASA and Comair? I can produce the letter that proves LOA 2006-10 has already ceased to be available.
I'm pretty sure a waiver mitigates our ability to enforce this language. Do you disagree? Further, our MEC does not want to enforce this language.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?
In matters of contract enforcement - no - it does not.
Then how about our waiver to ASA and Comair? I can produce the letter that proves LOA 2006-10 has already ceased to be available.
I'm pretty sure a waiver mitigates our ability to enforce this language. Do you disagree? Further, our MEC does not want to enforce this language.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?
In matters of contract enforcement - no - it does not.
The JCBA intended to retain status quo of the DAL PWA for all sections not intentionally altered. The modifications were designed to incorporate what NWA had in their agreement, not a land grab or "gotcha" negotiating. Same is true for the AK codeshare.
You know this.
10-12-2009, 06:05 AM
#33
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
ACL - It is what it is. We (as members of one organization) screwed up. At least your and my voice is on the recorder saying "climb, CLIMB!" If anyone digs the history of this accident out of the mud, they'll find the letters and resolutions documenting that.
None of the miscreants are running for office again, but one. It should be an election issue for him. The rest is water under the bridge. We must acknowledge failure and try to talk these guys out of defending their bankruptcy bargaining mentality before the next loss.
There is absolutely no point in excusing or in any way exonerating or explaining their vote. They failed to educate themselves on the issues, they failed to vote in accordance with the express interests of their pilots, they further divided our union and took action which will harm Delta pilots. It needs to be judged on its merits. Then we need to let it go, it is done. I hate the way my Reps voted, but I still think they are good guys, great pilots, dads, etc... but, I'm never going to tell them they did the right thing when they clearly made an error.
Now the battle line moves to the "100 seater" and 737 flying. I'm very concerned by the statements many 767 Captains make and they make it clear - they'd sell the 737 flying in an instant.
Another consideration - supply and demand. As we supply more outsourced flying - demand for outsourced flying decreases. We already see this in 76 seat rates (which was the only legitimate justification for this representational retreat). It would be prudent to run the numbers on 100 seat outsourcing and 130 and 160 and 180 seat outsourcing. The reason being that this could be economically modeled. Like the 76 seat flying, I believe we would see that we sell flying for nearly nothing. Somebody needs to do the numbers to prove to the 767 crowd that selling everything short of the 757 does not benefit them, not a bit.
Of course those who gain political power by "selling" this outsourcing resist doing an audit of their results. IMHO the best way to attack this misguided policy is with economic analysis. We'll have plenty of time to work on this while on furlough.
None of the miscreants are running for office again, but one. It should be an election issue for him. The rest is water under the bridge. We must acknowledge failure and try to talk these guys out of defending their bankruptcy bargaining mentality before the next loss.
There is absolutely no point in excusing or in any way exonerating or explaining their vote. They failed to educate themselves on the issues, they failed to vote in accordance with the express interests of their pilots, they further divided our union and took action which will harm Delta pilots. It needs to be judged on its merits. Then we need to let it go, it is done. I hate the way my Reps voted, but I still think they are good guys, great pilots, dads, etc... but, I'm never going to tell them they did the right thing when they clearly made an error.
Now the battle line moves to the "100 seater" and 737 flying. I'm very concerned by the statements many 767 Captains make and they make it clear - they'd sell the 737 flying in an instant.
Another consideration - supply and demand. As we supply more outsourced flying - demand for outsourced flying decreases. We already see this in 76 seat rates (which was the only legitimate justification for this representational retreat). It would be prudent to run the numbers on 100 seat outsourcing and 130 and 160 and 180 seat outsourcing. The reason being that this could be economically modeled. Like the 76 seat flying, I believe we would see that we sell flying for nearly nothing. Somebody needs to do the numbers to prove to the 767 crowd that selling everything short of the 757 does not benefit them, not a bit.
Of course those who gain political power by "selling" this outsourcing resist doing an audit of their results. IMHO the best way to attack this misguided policy is with economic analysis. We'll have plenty of time to work on this while on furlough.
Most guys I fly with on the 767 get it. I mean that. There are one or two that cannot see to the end of their nose, but most get it and see what outsourcing has done to their pay check. Even if they are only worried about themselves they see what the loss of jobs and the reduced portion of DAL pilots performing DAL flying has done for them.
The trick is going to be to get them to make one a priority over the other. Most want both, and I think we may be able to get most of both, but timing is everything.
10-12-2009, 06:05 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
If the flow went away as the result of a transaction that no longer had Compass or it's successor doing any flying for DAL, yes, I believe it could no longer be enforced.
10-12-2009, 06:07 AM
#35
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Slow:
Then how about our waiver to ASA and Comair? I can produce the letter that proves LOA 2006-10 has already ceased to be available.
I'm pretty sure a waiver mitigates our ability to enforce this language. Do you disagree? Further, our MEC does not want to enforce this language.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?
In matters of contract enforcement - no - it does not.
Then how about our waiver to ASA and Comair? I can produce the letter that proves LOA 2006-10 has already ceased to be available.
I'm pretty sure a waiver mitigates our ability to enforce this language. Do you disagree? Further, our MEC does not want to enforce this language.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?
In matters of contract enforcement - no - it does not.
10-12-2009, 06:09 AM
#36
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by shadyops
Of course I am whining an lashing out. You would too if you were at a regional and sick and tired of hearing from DAL pilots that they want something different out of ALPA than its regional members. We want the same thing...They are using this as an excuse to take care of themselves. You can wonder till you are blue in the face (like the one above), but anyone educated on the issue actually knows what's going on here. What a load, this whole thing is a load. Half of Delta flying is flown by non-Delta pilots...that's a load. I am lashing out and YOU SHOULD BE TOO. I am frustated to see more mainline jobs at risk now and they will be dissapearing, but I am a "regional" pilot so you probably think I want my "regional" airline to grow to I can upgrade to captain sooner. I can upgrade here at Compass as the job I really get "transitioned" to the toilet paper contract we have here. Maybe you will get furloughed and have the pleasure of flying here. I take it you've never been at a regional before?
10-12-2009, 06:11 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Left, left, left right left....
Posts: 911
Originally Posted by slowplay
Then you are incorrect.
where I am in error. References if you please.Are you saying that regardless of who buys CPS or the disposition of the acft, whether flown for DCI or not, the Co. must reduce to 85 76 seaters if the flow is not honored?
10-12-2009, 06:13 AM
#38
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
Originally Posted by slowplay
Wrong.
The JCBA intended to retain status quo of the DAL PWA for all sections not intentionally altered. The modifications were designed to incorporate what NWA had in their agreement, not a land grab or "gotcha" negotiating. Same is true for the AK codeshare.
You know this.
The JCBA intended to retain status quo of the DAL PWA for all sections not intentionally altered. The modifications were designed to incorporate what NWA had in their agreement, not a land grab or "gotcha" negotiating. Same is true for the AK codeshare.
You know this.
What about our pay rates, or other sections of our contract?
And if we've waived part of this, unilaterally, what effect does that have on the rest? You are writing that this contract language is absolute, yet you know it is not, we have already waived it!
Frankly, I am scared when my Reps tell me "our contract is working because no one knows how to administer it." We just had some management types on the jumpseat talking about the furlough discussions this Summer. Yeah, I'm concerned.
10-12-2009, 06:19 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: New Hire
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
If Slow gets furloughed we are all in deep trouble. (If slow gets furloughed, we will be putting 1000's though CPS)
10-12-2009, 06:27 AM
#40
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
Originally Posted by slowplay
You probably ought to take your own advice...
Or you could just agree that rational people looked at a set of facts and came to a different conclusion. You don't have to question motives or impugn integrity.
IF the EC adopts the Delta MEC recommendation for CPZ to form its own MEC in October 2010, where is the additional outsourced flying coming from? It isn't. You're making a straw man argument.
Or you could just agree that rational people looked at a set of facts and came to a different conclusion. You don't have to question motives or impugn integrity.
IF the EC adopts the Delta MEC recommendation for CPZ to form its own MEC in October 2010, where is the additional outsourced flying coming from? It isn't. You're making a straw man argument.
Politically - no, I'm no where near the center and I'm not a politician. The Compass decision may have been very pragmatic - but that is not the explanation that was offered to us.
