Actually, yes. They have done so in the past and continue to do so. They are playing politics and saying what they need to say to get this passed.

Just look no further at the end of each negotiators notepad where they urge you to vote yes for the TA.

 

By your logic why even have a contract? You're saying when times get tough force manure will be used once again. Might as well not have a contract if the company can just do whatever it wants when it wants by claiming force majeur. Also, you are asking if the arrival of the 717's are written in the TA? Again, based on your logic things that are written in the contract don't really matter, so why worry about the 717's arrival being in written in the TA? It makes business sense for Delta to get the 717's and recover some of the rj flying using them. Management is not going to lie to us about getting 88 airplanes just so we'll sign a TA. How is it outsourcing our jobs if we are bringing more flying under mainline? We get 717's and more outsourced flying is done by us.

 

They have done what exactly in the past? And I don't quite understand your point about the negotiators notepad. Of course they are going to encourage us to vote for it. They feel it's the best deal we can get. They're not going to have 1000's of hours of negotiations and then tell us it's not the best deal we could get so don't vote for it.

 

Quit using logic, it doesn't work on this group.

 

Some CRJ trivia... That airframe was built for Comair in October 1998 and retired from Comair exactly ten years later. Delta has been making payments on that aircraft for the last 3 1/2 years to have it sit in storage. They're that expensive to operate.

I think Delta's dumping 50s whether you guys offer to pay for it, or not.

 

Actually, the failure in leadership was to send it back before it even got to the MEC. I think (while I am going to vote NO) that is too late to show our resolve. That resolve should have been with the Negotiating Committee to walk away if the terms weren't acceptable. Now that we've actually gotten a TA and the MEC has endorsed it I think it's too late to vote it down and go back and ask for more. The time to ask for me was with the NC telling the Company that these terms were not acceptable and we won't take this back to the MEC. That ship has sailed and I actually believe that DAL has put one over on us again (2 out of 3 now - POS 96 , C2K (for all of 3 years) and now POS C2012 ). JMHO.

 

Remember that Comair's 50's are cheaper to park (and continue to pay the leases on) as the leases were renegotiated in bankruptcy to be significantly lower than the lease payments on all other 50 seaters. That's why the more costly leased 50's continue to fly...to subsidize those leases. Hence the desire to terminate/renegotiate those leases in exchange for new crj900's.

 

.................................................. .

 

I am not talking about the entire contract. I am talking about the contract as it relates to your statement that "what happened with with furloughs and dci hiring can never happen again under this ta."

Is it not true that delta management "illegally" furloughed a group of pilots claiming continued force majeure after 9/11?? That is precisely my point. Management will take force majeure to whatever distance they want and tell us to "grieve it." To say that something like that can "never" happen again seems ignorant of history. I know some will say: but if the grievance is won they will have to bring them back. That doesn't pay the bills while you are out on furlough during the process. Again, a blanket statement by you that something can never happen again seems to be forgetting history.


Exactly! So why are they saying that the arrival of the 717's is tied to the passing of the TA? If it makes sense for them to do it, they will do it regardless.

You don't know that any more than my slight suspicion that management's agreement "in principle" with the owners of those aircraft will somehow fall through "due to circumstances beyond our control." I just don't understand this blind "faith" in management. All we have is a "promise" based on an agreement "in principle." I'm not saying for certain that it won't happen, but let's maintain a healthy skepticism on management here. Have we already forgotten the "help us get the slot swap passed" followed by "90% of the flights are dci?"

 

And this is our biggest problem! If everyone prepared for this Sect. 6 like it was going to mean no paycheck for a month then I am sure most or more would be willing to vote no to try and get the MAXIMUM out of this turd!
If this thing passes by 1% then the company knows that it's all they could have gotten. If it passes by more than 1%, lets say something like 62% in favor and 38% not in favor, we are telling them they gave us too much so in the next Section 6 they will offer even less and try and take even more!
The flip to that is a no vote by 1% and I don't think they would throw all this work away and go it full sect 6 and the contention that ensues. They would tweak it with the bare minimum they think it will then pass by.