You mean Dr Alinsky the apologist cheerleader?

 

I knew someone would come up with that. Congrats Denny! You are correct.

As you are too Slowplay. Knew you might crawl out of somewhere and chime in.

I get wistful thinking about those days. It really was quite a time back then. This 3 B 6 you speak of, it was fantastic when we still had that in our contract. It was so effective.

But, do you know what was even better than having it back then?

DALPA, back in that decade, was not the least bit afraid to USE it.

DALPA, back in that decade understood that there were some instances that our interests aligned with management.

And more importantly, there were other instances that our interests were not aligned and had to be fought for. DALPA was not being obstructionist by holding out with 3 B 6, they were just conducting good business on behalf of their constituents. And it was just business, not personal.

Just like it was good business for Leo to tell us, "A contract is a contract," when DALPA came looking for a mid contract adjustment when Delta was rolling in the profit of the dot com decade.

When is DALPA going to get it and understand that this constructive engagement is not working to our advantage?

DPA would be gone like a pit bull fart in a windy dog park if DALPA would become a true bottom up org, be transparent financially, and not be afraid to use our leverage when it is good business for us to do so.

Remember, it is ALWAYS just business.

 

For Shiznit;

You may want to lighten up. I did not state any support for DPA, just a lot of support for why the Delta pilots should make the Delta MEC theirs. I believe they can do that but your arguments seems to support status quo with no push to make it better through responsive representation.
My post is my opinion supported by my experience and my stated observations, no proof required just like your opinion requires no proof.

LP

 

Disagree. The legal resources we currently use in negotiation have a conflicting interest to the pilot group, but, not necessarily to the DALPA Committee/MEC members.

It is appealing to think that perhaps one day we as pilots could hire a law firm to represent our needs without succumbing to prejudice and outside or parallel interests.

And as for economic resources, please. An investment bank is much better suited for that than EFA ever will be.

As for safety, can't speak to that accurately but I believe it is outsourced/made available to other outside unions as well like aeromedical.

And as to influence in Washington, debatable. Stark reality is that no matter how large ALPA is, they will never have the financial firepower that A for A has or Boeing.

Only real tool ALPA has is SOS if a situation was definitely career threatening. Question is, would they ever use it? I'd say doubtful with LM there in Virginia.

 

Why would DALPA limit themselves to 18.2% raises next time? Oh you mean full restoration like with buying power too, oh and pensions?(yeah lets put our retirement back in the hands of those that terminated em)


Point is, the word restoration feels good, but has multiple meanings for a lot of pilots here at DAL.

What does it mean for a fNWA guy/gal versus a fDAL guy/gal? What were NWA's former top rates? Does this PWA hit em? How close does it get?

See I was less than thrilled with last years PWA, but it was determined, debated, resolved. Its high time we move on and focus on now what we should have done, but how we work going forward. Difference today is a company with real profits, not projections, a S&P listed company, one paying dividends, one paying exces and others well, and one that has lead the industry in PRASM for something like 23 of the last 24 quarters. We are also going to be in a "up economy" with the rest of the industry effectively equal on total compensation. I'd say the negotiating environment looks better this round, kind of like C2K with some notable differences, like debt.

I'd also say that DAL pilots have previously enjoyed a premium from the rest of the US sector and given where we are, it is time to put that back as a discussion point. Openers are 15 months out so lets look forward.

 

Very well stated!

 

15 months...plenty of time for the company to invent a crisis...and for DALPA to sell the **** out of it. See also: Fleeting opportunities, 717s, parking 50 seaters, etc.

 

Cynicism aside, that brings up an interesting concept. Can the pilot group be "sold", or does it make reasonable choices regardless of the presentation?

It's important now because we've watched DPA "selling" for over 4 years, and less than half of the pilot group are buying. So, is the pilot group too easily swayed to make good decisions in the face of a "sell job"?

The DPA is clearly "selling". They have a unique advantage right now because they have no record for pilots to evaluate. They've never had to make a tough choice in a crisis. They've never had to count votes to see of the pilot group is with them. They've had 4 years, and we're not.

How much longer does the "selling" need to continue unsuccessfully for the salesmen to pack it up, and start helping ALPA move forward?

 

The pilot group can be "sold" a bad deal by a slanted presentation, and it's not their fault .... once.
If that happens a second time, it is their fault.

 

So your thesis is that the pilot group is gullible and can be "sold"?

If the DPA were to win a representation election with say, 62%, would the die be cast for charges of "sell job!"? Or would it be, "The pilots have spoken!"?

Does anyone know where DPA stands on Split Duty Periods? I'd like to see them take a stand on controversial issues rather than issues they pick and choose to make ALPA look out-of-touch. Take a stand on an issue we can measure and evaluate, and let's see if DPA is out-of-touch, too.