What do you mean? It's right in part 117. You're referring to the interpretation by 2 individuals with whom you spoke to. Not all of DALPA. Others disagreed with their interpretation, and agreed with yours. Are you implying that an alternative union would never have differences of interpretations and opinions? That they would ALWAYS agree on everything? Interpretations, the best way to go about things, etc?

Reference the current Scheduling Reference Handbook. Page 18 does discuss flying fatigued. If you aren't rested, you call in fatigued. If your reason for calling in fatigued is justified, you will be supported by DALPA.

How do you know? Did you read the surveys of all the participants? Or are you simply making an assumption based off your personal desires of restoring C2K buying power?

 

That's a good question. Based on what they have published, DPA representation would likely result in stalemated negotiations which drag on for years while we try unsuccessfully to get released to self help. Contract 2015 might get ratified in 2020, if we are lucky. Meanwhile, we could enjoy the not so good 3..3..0..0..0..0 of Contract 2012.

I don't expect ALPA to stroke a home run out of the park, but, it is likely they will find a way to improve on Contract 2012, thus avoiding the 3..0..0..0, etc ... .

Of course, like the hacking incident, there are reports of weird stuff going on that does not make a lot of sense. Why would management (which had observed all of this for several days already) go bizerk? There are cameras in there.

I saw the DPA go team twice. Said hello (with my ALPA gear in plain sight), everyone was friendly and professional.

As for "attacking pilots" the DPA has told their supporters to turn other pilots into the CPO for any perceived slights on several occasions, ran to the FBI with what they claimed was criminal activity and now sued pilots who they claim are either ALPA, the Delta MEC, or ALPA supporters at Delta. Frankly, those guys scare me & I've been nothing but respectful to them.

 

I never said they were viewable. Did I? The fact that he couldn't read them is exactly my point. He can only assume what others were asking for. And who gave up 33% of profit sharing? Where are those numbers from? It is also true more large RJs were allowed per C2012, but we also received a valuable domestic mainline to RJ BHR. Regional flying continues to decrease, while Mainline flying continues to increase. And while you angrily protest C2012, 62% of your peers voted YES. Shouldn't that make you question just exactly what your peers really were asking for?

 

No.
It should make me question how much of our dues money DALPA dumped into the C12 sales job (saving the company the expense of selling it). It was a coordinated campaign, which contained misleading, misinterpreted, and generally misbegotten "facts" regarding C12.

Do you really think 62% of pilots would vote for C12 today, after they've seen how disingenuous DALPA's sales job was? If so...you are pathetically out of touch.

 

We went from 15% to 10% as a percentage that's a 33% reduction. Sure Alpa's massages it to sound like only 5% but in reality we gave back a third or 33%. Now for real numbers. If next year the company makes 3 billion which sounds like it is a real possibility this "little 5%" reduction In profit sharing will cost the pilot group 125 million in lost profit sharing. Those are big numbers that were a concession.

Now for the RJ issue. I would have held to the point to let management keep those airplanes and enjoy trying to staff those airplanes. If the top paying regional airline's are canceling flights because of lack of crew's you think air line management had any choice other than upgague there fleets. My answer would be no, call there bluff, pilots should fly airplanes and leave the negotiations to the experts with insight from pilots.

 

Not only that but paying for all those new engines and heavy checks thereby financially committing to those obsolete, high cost, inefficient, uneconomical, umcomfortable and competitively despised POS's for a very long time. Empty threat, and we fell for it.

C12 had some good things and some bad things WRT scope in it. Much of the good would have happened anyway. The biggest unknown was the large turboprop issue. Its nice to lock down that variable though. It really is. But there was absolutely no way the company was going to marry all those 50 seaters.

 

You're the type of individual that will always question things. Why don't you provide some of those misleading, misinterpreted, and generally misbegotten facts of C2012? Will they be similar to the facts DPA had provided us over the years?

And can answer your own question? How do you know how people would vote? Are you assuming that the majority holds the same desires and wish lists as you? You are certain that you know how the majority would vote today and in 2012? And I'm out of touch?

 

So 15%-10%=33%? You're going to need to provide a better explanation than that.

Perhaps you should run for the negotiating committee. Elections are in March. I truly admire your tenacity, and hope to see your name on the ballot. This may come across as sarcastic, but it isn't. Please. Do it. Make the change.

 

One of the DALPA people putting out this erroneous info is the chairman of DALPA's scheduling committee. Another is a Captain rep in SLC who also used to be chairman of our negotiating committee.

You said they've since corrected this. The quote you provide does not address it.

And as for the survey results... It doesn't matter whether I've seen them or not. You and I both know it was way more than 4833. For DALPA to tell us, "we hear you loud and clear", was either dishonesty or incompetence.

 

It's your responsibility to decide whether you're adequately rested or not. It always has been. Stop trying to push your decisions onto someone else. If you didn't receive your rest opportunity, then make the call to the company. I know the stance of your ATL reps, as do you. They never agreed with the individuals you mentioned. So while you continue to attempt to make an issue out of this, it's already known that this isn't an issue.


No we don't. We don't know that it was way more. You can only guess or assume that it was. And the statement by ALPA was not dishonesty or incompetence. Just because you believe that we should have received more doesn't make it a reality. You can continue to shout from the rooftops that we should have the buying power of C2K again, but based on the rest of the industry and our peers rates your numbers are way out of range. Pattern bargaining has ALWAYS paved the way. It will take time to get the buying power back. Your belief that DPA will somehow be better or do it faster is nothing more than hope for change. Nothing more than a gamble. And one that I'm not willing to take.