Delta Pilots Association
10-31-2010, 01:01 PM
#2031
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: Boeing Boss
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Sorry, I did not follow that. Can we use another metaphor?
10-31-2010, 01:27 PM
#2032
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Bar, you make a ton of great points over the last few pages.
WRT DAL's 1113C proceeding, at the end of the day, the pilots voted for it. Saying that one organization over the other would have done differently is 1) convenient, and 2) hearsay.
Pilots are stating that their "union" told them to vote this way. Well, yes they did. I say quit faulting your union, we all seem to have type "A" personalities when it suits us and portray little sheep being lead to slaughter when it doesn't. Think freely, and vote your conscience, not what someone tells you to do. Changing a name plaque will not change the way pilot group votes.
Like many have wrote, before anything can really happen here, one must change the apathy here. Change that and whomever the association's name is, it will result in a better trend.
* Note as I read the law, if a judge imposed a contract on a labor group after throwing one out in the 1113C process, that contract immediately becomes amendable after 1113C protection ends. To me that means that if one was imposed, the day DAL would have excited 1113C protection, we would of snapped back to the pre 1113C PWA or would have immediately begun a section six. Agreements like LOA 51 supersede this part of the code and last beyond 1113C since they are agreed to, and not imposed.
WRT DAL's 1113C proceeding, at the end of the day, the pilots voted for it. Saying that one organization over the other would have done differently is 1) convenient, and 2) hearsay.
Pilots are stating that their "union" told them to vote this way. Well, yes they did. I say quit faulting your union, we all seem to have type "A" personalities when it suits us and portray little sheep being lead to slaughter when it doesn't. Think freely, and vote your conscience, not what someone tells you to do. Changing a name plaque will not change the way pilot group votes.
Like many have wrote, before anything can really happen here, one must change the apathy here. Change that and whomever the association's name is, it will result in a better trend.
* Note as I read the law, if a judge imposed a contract on a labor group after throwing one out in the 1113C process, that contract immediately becomes amendable after 1113C protection ends. To me that means that if one was imposed, the day DAL would have excited 1113C protection, we would of snapped back to the pre 1113C PWA or would have immediately begun a section six. Agreements like LOA 51 supersede this part of the code and last beyond 1113C since they are agreed to, and not imposed.
10-31-2010, 01:30 PM
#2033
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Splash, this applies to your post as well:
Very, very, true.
The most frustrating lie promulgated on us during the bankruptcy was that scope concessions were forced on us. If you look at the actual negotiator's notes and publications, ALPA was proud of the "credits" it received by selling jobs. In truth ALPA bargained scope rather than fight to clarify the murky gray area which exists between bankruptcy law and the Railway Labor Act.
There is a debate whether management can ask for, and a Judge agree to, interference in collective bargaining representation, or job protection provisions to remove scope in a 113c. The law is conflicting, but clearly the union should take the view that favors us, particularly in our case since Congress actually exempted us via their recognition of the Railway Labor Act in our bargaining.
While the Supreme Court has not weighed in yet, the decisions on the Federal Appellate Court level have been going in the favor of transportation unions. Certainly economic portions of agreements can be modified by the Courts, but thus far NO Judge has touched job protection provisions, or scope.
We should not forget the goal of a bankruptcy court is to facilitate the reorganization of a business so as to best protect stakeholders. The law is in the favor of employees who's livelihoods are more greatly effected by smaller changes (than say multi billion dollar investment banks) and of course employees are needed to staff the going concern if the business is to work its way out of bankrupcty.
(legalese warning):
Very, very, true.
The most frustrating lie promulgated on us during the bankruptcy was that scope concessions were forced on us. If you look at the actual negotiator's notes and publications, ALPA was proud of the "credits" it received by selling jobs. In truth ALPA bargained scope rather than fight to clarify the murky gray area which exists between bankruptcy law and the Railway Labor Act.
There is a debate whether management can ask for, and a Judge agree to, interference in collective bargaining representation, or job protection provisions to remove scope in a 113c. The law is conflicting, but clearly the union should take the view that favors us, particularly in our case since Congress actually exempted us via their recognition of the Railway Labor Act in our bargaining.
While the Supreme Court has not weighed in yet, the decisions on the Federal Appellate Court level have been going in the favor of transportation unions. Certainly economic portions of agreements can be modified by the Courts, but thus far NO Judge has touched job protection provisions, or scope.
We should not forget the goal of a bankruptcy court is to facilitate the reorganization of a business so as to best protect stakeholders. The law is in the favor of employees who's livelihoods are more greatly effected by smaller changes (than say multi billion dollar investment banks) and of course employees are needed to staff the going concern if the business is to work its way out of bankrupcty.
(legalese warning):
10-31-2010, 01:53 PM
#2034
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
Originally Posted by Splash
Different judge.
Different contract.
Different circumstances.
You need to prove that the DPA would do it differently.
Different contract.
Different circumstances.
You need to prove that the DPA would do it differently.
So, right back at you
1. Same BK code and court system, is it not?
2. Same RLA that the contracts and enforcement of them fall under, is it not?
3. Same 1113C process, is it not?
4. Both airlines were in rerceivership, were they not?
So, you tell us what the judge and the circumstances were that caused DALPA to take such a different tack and strategy during the process and then to sell it as the best option in the road shows, because they did.
Remember the statement, "If you reject this TA the next words out of your mouth will be do you want fries with that."
Remember the power points that only included AAA and UAL in the data? Then, when questioned about HAL and there data and why it wasn't included, their answer was that they were not in a "real bk, theirs is a sham bk."
F U D
OK. Got to go. Not trying to get the last word but it is Halloween and I have a young ones costume to get ready....and there is football on even if it is NFL. Later.
10-31-2010, 01:56 PM
#2035
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
Originally Posted by Reroute
How's that LOA 93 working for them? They get their snap backs yet? How about their note for their pension termination? Any word on what they got from their claim?
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.
Trick or treat reroute! Tell us, had they not been purchased by Doug and survived, what would they have enjoyed?
Snap Backs!
Looks like we got the trick here. Dooohhh! Could have....Should have, had them.
10-31-2010, 01:57 PM
#2036
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
I understand what this one means Bar, some may not. Care to expand?
There is no difference between contract 2012 negotiations and the way ALPA handled bankruptcy, both being bargaining events.
-------------------------------------------
The DPA would have most likely made the same decision, which was driven by the will to maximize the bargaining results for the represented constituency ... and we agreed by ratifying the agreement.
The Manager is exactly right when he states the politics of fear were used to coerce those who might have shouted the agreement down. Like him, I resent the misinformation which made our union appear weaker than it really is.
One component of "fear" is that most of the time we fear the unknown. The information disparity between ALPA and line guys is used to give the politicians the upper hand, but it detracts from true understanding of the issues which would allow the pilots to make informed decisions regarding their careers. The politics of fear fits right into the "trust us, we know what is best for you."
To get back on topic, I've read nothing what so ever that the DPA intends one iota of difference from ALPA in this regard. In fact, by parroting the politics of "conflicts of interest" they set the stage for exactly more of the same. The difference between them and ALPA, is ALPA was smart enough to know what it was doing & roll out the straw man.
Like previous straw men, baseless threats have confused many line pilots and even some working within ALPA. They fail to understand the greatest tool available to our union and fail to appreciate it. The result is a weakened ALPA who's future is at risk from apathy and efforts like the DPA.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 10-31-2010 at 02:09 PM.
10-31-2010, 02:05 PM
#2037
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by TheManager
Trick or treat reroute! Tell us, had they not been purchased by Doug and survived, what would they have enjoyed?
Snap Backs!
Looks like we got the trick here. Dooohhh! Could have....Should have, had them.
Snap Backs!
Looks like we got the trick here. Dooohhh! Could have....Should have, had them.
Doug also tried to buy DAL while DAL was in BK, didn't work out too well for Doug.
Back on topic, you brought it up, now back it up, don't dodge the question.
So tell me how it worked out for them? Claim, note, snap backs, etc.
They've also gone independent, how's that working for them?
10-31-2010, 02:08 PM
#2038
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,838
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
How about if I sum up:
There is no difference between contract 2012 negotiations and the way ALPA handled bankruptcy, both being bargaining events.
The DPA would have most likely made the same decision, which was driven by the will to maximize the bargaining results for the represented constituency ... and we agreed by ratifying the agreement.
The Manager is exactly right when he states the politics of fear were used to coerce those who might have shouted the agreement down. Like him, I resent the misinformation which made our union appear weaker than it really is.
One component of "fear" is that most of the time we fear the unknown. The information disparity between ALPA and line guys is used to give the politicians the upper hand, but it detracts from true understanding of the issues which would allow the pilots to make informed decisions regarding their careers. The politics of fear fits right into the "trust us, we know what is best for you."
To get back on topic, I've read nothing what so ever that the DPA intends one iota of difference from ALPA in this regard. In fact, by parroting the politics of "conflicts of interest" they set the stage for exactly more of the same. The difference between them and ALPA, is ALPA was smart enough to know what it was doing & roll out the straw man.
There is no difference between contract 2012 negotiations and the way ALPA handled bankruptcy, both being bargaining events.
-------------------------------------------
The DPA would have most likely made the same decision, which was driven by the will to maximize the bargaining results for the represented constituency ... and we agreed by ratifying the agreement.
The Manager is exactly right when he states the politics of fear were used to coerce those who might have shouted the agreement down. Like him, I resent the misinformation which made our union appear weaker than it really is.
One component of "fear" is that most of the time we fear the unknown. The information disparity between ALPA and line guys is used to give the politicians the upper hand, but it detracts from true understanding of the issues which would allow the pilots to make informed decisions regarding their careers. The politics of fear fits right into the "trust us, we know what is best for you."
To get back on topic, I've read nothing what so ever that the DPA intends one iota of difference from ALPA in this regard. In fact, by parroting the politics of "conflicts of interest" they set the stage for exactly more of the same. The difference between them and ALPA, is ALPA was smart enough to know what it was doing & roll out the straw man.
Heyas Bar,
I agree. Again, a very observant post. ALPA will not change. They are too ironbound by their communications scripture to deviate from it. It doesn't look like the next DALPA leadership will be any different.
Pilots are literally crying out for any kind of alternative.
If the DPA (assuming this is even a serious effort, and not "just some guys") plays ALPA's game, THEY WILL CERTAINLY FAIL, because ALPA has been playing this game for 80 years, and they know it well..
Right now, DPA has shown that they are no different, and we get a nice helping of uncertainty to boot. The moment the DPA stops playing ALPA's game, is when they become a viable alternative, and a serious contender.
Nu
10-31-2010, 02:26 PM
#2039
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
Originally Posted by Reroute
Doug also tried to buy DAL while DALO was in BK, didn't work out too well for Doug.
Back on topic, you brought it up, now back it up, don't dodge the question.
So tell me how it worked out for them? Claim, note, snap backs, etc.
They've also gone independent, how's that working for them?
Back on topic, you brought it up, now back it up, don't dodge the question.
So tell me how it worked out for them? Claim, note, snap backs, etc.
They've also gone independent, how's that working for them?
Eaasssy Francis! No one is dodging anything. I was making the point that USAir, then an ALPA represented airline, had the strategy to include.....snap backs.
That would have worked great for them...had Doug not purchased them. They are currently arbitrating the LOA93, although it is not likely they will prevail. Management's position is that it was made null and void as part of the purchse agreement. Get the popcorn cause we should see the result of this one soon.
I never made any statements about the claim. You did. I will say nice job on DALPA's part, but they were almost too singularly focused on that. On that note...be sure to give credit where it is due on the final pay out number. If it were not for Uncle Doug, the price of the notes would've been way less. It always leaves a nasty taste in my mouth when the folks that got us that # claim it was due to any other reason than that. Again, don't get me wrong, glad we got it, but don't stretch the truth with revisionist history
They left ALPA unfortunately to try and circumnavigate the Nicolau Award. Not working out as they left for the wrong reasons.
Let's ask SWAPA, UPS, et all how things are.
Fact, If DAL does go independant, and DAL does join CAPA, they just became the largest pilot lobbying group in the US. How about ALPA PAC then?
10-31-2010, 02:29 PM
#2040
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: Boeing Boss
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by TheManager
I am not saying that DPA would do it differently, I am saying that DALPA should have.
Originally Posted by TheManager
1. Same BK code and court system, is it not?
Originally Posted by TheManager
2. Same RLA that the contracts and enforcement of them fall under, is it not?
Originally Posted by TheManager
3. Same 1113C process, is it not?
Originally Posted by TheManager
4. Both airlines were in rerceivership, were they not?
Originally Posted by TheManager
So, you tell us what the judge and the circumstances were that caused DALPA to take such a different tack and strategy during the process and then to sell it as the best option in the road shows, because they did.
Originally Posted by TheManager
OK. Got to go. Not trying to get the last word but it is Halloween and I have a young ones costume to get ready....and there is football on even if it is NFL. Later.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 10:33 AM
