ACL

I do not pretend to be a self appointed smart man in the room (although I do have a great business) or a GOLD GURU with an agenda with a long winded false essay.
ACL, its a little investment. Please hire an attorney (well worth the diligence) and see what they have to say. My friend should not be abe to sway your thoughts. Your own due diligence is enough. Vote for what you believe. I believed NO in the beginning. But I needed an unbiased replay, thus my friend. His basic debrief stated that the company can sway and manipulate this TA. That is it. I am no fool, Delta has hired clever attorneys to draft this up and I am proud that my company has this as their tool. I am pro Delta, but I also am PRO-TEN and TEAM.

Respectfully,

TEN

 

How much experience does he have with the RLA and the NMB?

It's a pretty unique area of law.

I'd like to know his reasoning also...

 

I have two friends who are attorneys and as much as I hate lawyers they are both outstanding at what they do and have taught me a lot about law. It has definitely changed my opinion of when to use a lawyer (if you need one don't skimp - you will regret it). I have not liked what I have read so far - is there anything specific you are comfortable sharing with us on his opinions of the weaknesses (beyond the obvious pay issues).

 

Shiz,

Actually, contract law is what it is. The RLA prescribes the methods to resolving disagreements (major/minor disputes) and the NMB is what it is in the section 6 process.

So, looking at contract verbiage is separate from the airline industry. Interpretation of that language is the same no matter the contract relative to the law. How a disagreement/grievance is handled is the difference.

The devil always lies in the details of the exact language.

Frats,
Lee

 

Shiz,
It is a unique law, from what I gather. However, some contracts are cleverly crafted to benefit one side while they are drafted to be a mutually agreeable document.

He has been at it for many years. Corporate, Corporate Contracts etc...The language is "loose" and non-enforceable. Nothing with the RLA or NMB. However, I trust him a great deal. He knows contracts so we can sit down without emotions and talk.

After reading the TA, I came to a NO conclusion. So I read again and again and again and again with the same conclusion. Then I noted that some pilots were pretty happy with this TA, so I thought,maybe, I read it wrong or missed something. So I read it again and came to the same, no, conclusion. That is when I thought to myself, "this is my future, lets get someone who knows contracts, to read it and explain to me without bias." His conclusion reinforced my decision.

Then again his lack of experience with RLA and NMB could be reinforcing my false opinion, but I doubt it.

DAL73n,

Im sure they will decipher the TA for you (buy them beer or give 'em a few bucks). I would be interested to see if you come to the same conclusion after they debrief you.

My 2 points of fail with this TA are:

1)Pay-The numbers are low. Sure you can make the numbers look bigger by adding them, compounding them, and including other metrics. I want bigger pay numbers with-out creative math I would like to see a minimum of 20/7/7. I would like 25/10/10.
2)Scope-90 seat aircraft dummied up to look like 76 seat aircraft belong to mainline. How long will it take Delta to allow the full 90 seats on them? Me thinks that even if we flew these aircraft for free, Delta would not allow it.

TEN

 

Actually, my personal minimums (which are/were flexible based on significant gains in other parts of the contract (e.g. a daily minimum of 5:30 or higher) were 10/10/4/4 with increases to the DC of 2%/year to 20% in 2015. Not sure what the cost to the company is but that would be 6%, 1.5%, 1%, 1% higher and 2%, 1%, 2% higher in the DC. The DC is crucial to me because I currently can't come close to maxing out the 415 limit of $51K even with a catch up of $22.5K (over 50 with a catch up). I want (need?) to get close to that 415 max so 20% gets me close and for higher paid F/Os and CAs they will be able to max out their 401K every year. While I have a number I can get by on at Age 65 my wife and I have big plans that will require a lot of money and I want to be able to enjoy my post 65 years (by the way, I plan to continue working (I enjoy my work both @ DAL and my side career) although my post 65 years I will be semi-retired.

 

I'm glad to hear some lawyers also agreeing. This is so important. Loose language is bad enough, but unenforceable language is a disaster. Especially when your main defense for giving up more large RJ's (really mainline jets) is based on a protection plan defined by unenforceable language.

Carl

 

I too would like to see this.

 

T,

Read the posts above. The reasonings are in there. Dont believe them? Do your own research or perhaps hire a lawyer to read you the contracts. Cheap investment if you think about it.

I am one vote. I invested in my future by reinforcing my belief and stance. You can do the same thing. I could keep my mouth shut, but as a business owner and sales person, I see it a mile away. There is a sales push going on, even thought the MEC, said no.

Road shows, question and answers etc, will not make my decision for me (I will attend, though) because they are put on by the very source that approves the TA.

Sincerely-->TEN

 

DAL73n,

Absolutely a great desire! At this time, in my position, I am OK with our retirement. But I will support and sacrifice my desire for your requests

TEN