One thing that's interesting is that the Pinnacle scope contract requires the integration of the our pilot group onto an acquiring carriers list if the acquisition results in a reduction of airframes here at 9E. Why Lee Moak signed this I don't know, that's massive leverage management has against you guys.

And THAT right there Bill is why nobody can discuss this with you unless they are also overcome with illogical fear.

You are behaving EXACTLY like the AirTran pilots. They had the newly passed McCaskill-Bond legislation on their side, yet they accepted SWA's seniority list offer because of fear. Totally unreasoned fear.

Saying that strikes have to be ruled out is blind illogical fear. The NMB has NEVER said this. This White House has NEVER said this. This Congress has NEVER said this. Yet you state this as though it was fact. If you want to behave like an AirTran pilot, that's fine. But it literally sickens me.

Carl

Ridiculous posts don't help your cause Bill. The pilot's survey didn't demand full restoration. The best evidence I have is that the average ask was about 25% on date of signing and holding the line on scope. That didn't happen. But far more importantly, the MEC (our elected local reps) did not get a chance to guide the negotiating committee because the MEC administration went around the MEC and the process. That's the point. All your ridiculous straw men arguments won't change that fact.

Carl

I don't believe it is a "straw man" argument to give more credence to what they do, over what they say. That's all.

AFA, IAM, etc

Did you happen to follow any other the AFA drive over the last two years?

I disagree about "protocol", and 14 reps on the MEC agree with me. A couple of the reps didn't like it. Had there been an egregious breach of procedure I don't think we'd have gotten that margin on the MEC. Do you?

No question the DTW reps are unhappy about how their influence in the process was not followed. I'm trying to recall a time when they've EVER been happy... The question comes from whether we permit the minority to have their way in matters like this.

So you're including in your decision making process how the CEO sounds. Doesn't take much to convince some, apparently.

Lol- as I've said before, I'd love to play poker with him. Like swiping candy from a baby.
Hey Bill.........BOO!

I believe the "A" in "TA" stands for "Agreement".

Your car salesman analogy fails because the deal was AGREED to by both parties. At this point the MEC has presented the Agreement for ratification.

Our MEC endorsed the deal. Not everybody on the MEC, just like it doesn't take every congressman to pass a Bill. You get that. Let's get back on point. I think RA will not allow the rank-and-file to alter this deal quickly - within the next several months - because he doesn't want other groups to use it against him. What say you?

The AirTran/ SWA/ Boeing 717 deal along with the trade up with Bombardier was probably completed in an hour. No biggie......???

I bet they won't be too happy with a NO vote, which leads me to believe it could take a long time to renegotiate anything. Just a hunch, just like you guys have with your leverage thoughts.

This is a curious example for you to use Carl......as I'm sure you are aware, the Airtran MEC voted down the initial SLI agreement on an almost unanimous tally (7-1) in August 2011. They were rewarded for their bravery by having SWA release the dogs and they ended up with what nearly everyone believes is a worse deal than the first. That doesn't strike me as event where voting 'NO' leads to bigger and better things.

Finally a rational post from Bill "Lawnchair" Lumberg!!!:)

Glad your starting to see the light.

I already think the deal is a good one. Short duration, good pay for 3 years, 200 fewer 50 seaters, 717s. You and your friends have grandiose plans that don't float in this environment. I have complete faith in you that you'll figure it out. Have a great day!

The "six years later" part pointed to waiting atleast 6 more years for a resolution. Thanks, you also see it rationally too. Hallelujah!

Why would they be happy when it's voted down? They'll certainly know the pilots aren't happy with it. I doubt RA wants investors and passengers to know the pilots aren't happy. It would go against everything he's previously said in the press. He can, however, make them happy.

I think that the ultimate plan is another merger for Delta. RA wants labor peace before he initiates this move. If we don't have a contract done the pilots will do everything possible to slow down a merger. One only has to compare our merger vs. US/AMwest or UAL/CAL to see the value that we gave Delta.

Back to the original post. If this TA gets shot down my belief is that the company will quickly come back with another offer. Why? Because the next merger will not be smooth unless we're on board as happy campers :D

The worst case scenario for us if we shoot down this TA is that the 717's do not come and the company somehow would end up with 255 76 seat RJ's. I can live with the worst case results if the TA gets shot down.

If one believes a merger is around the corner, good chance the company will come back to the table in a hurry. Just my .02

...you forgot the part where we change the language from the PWA and allow an increase in the 76 seat fleet without growing mainline first and on top of that they don't have to park 70 seaters anymore.

And by the time this is all said and done we'll have more jumbo RJs then we currently have CRJ-200s, 325 vs 324.

Free Bird, actually if we ever got to 255 76 seaters it would be because we added 86ish jets to the mainline cause. Until then 153 is their cap on CR9s and its bigger friend the E75.

We need to grow a pair!

http://www.trucknutz.com/archivepopu...300&height=327

:rolleyes:

Not many Pro TA types like to admit that the 70/76 seat cap of 255 will get raised to 325 if we approve this TA. Any guess what the next cap will be when we do another merger?

I'm aware of that, just thought the audience understood that point. Point is that I can live with whatever happens if we vote this down.

That and they will have to deal with us over FTDT before the end of the year or they get no changes there. There is leverage times 2.

What I really question is whether the MEC Chairman and Negotiating Chairman who are already conceding we'll do worse and have to give up something for it are up to the task of being more aggressive when, if what I'm reading is even half true disregarded the will of the pilots and the direction they were given reference pay by the MEC?

Nah, I'll take the 717s and a 19.7% raise. If there is another merger, you can add more cash to it because of a JCBA that would be needed. Makes you wonder why the last 2 years of the TA would be at 3% each? That I guess could go up.

Actually, this problem is identical to the problem AT had. By letting it get this far (out of negotiations to a formal TA) we (all the pilots) have lost any leverage we might have had. While I'm a No vote because there are a lot of things I don't think are acceptable it is more a matter of principle for me than thinking that there will be enough No votes to turn this down. While I think we could have done a lot better I don't think this MEC and NC has any plan going forward should this fail ratification. This should have stayed in the negotiation phase until the terms were acceptable (yes, I understand NEGOTIATION) which included getting closer to the survey, not requiring more work (I now see where DALPA thinks our average work month should be 80 hours so they can make the financials look better for the pilots - remember - this is worth $54,000+ to all of us). By getting to a TA and getting it through the MEC, it put DAL on the current path (announcing the change of profit sharing to the rest of the rank and file, the new pay raise to the rank and file, the 717s being contingent on passing the TA, the early retirement program for pilots, and on and on) that will probably result in contentious negotiations going forward. Don't tell me this is the best we can do - I just don't believe it (yes, I have read the TA - multiple times, and yes - I have looked at the NNPs and council member letters).

Smart people realize the house always wins, hence never gamble.

I agree. The TA is a good deal.

Sorry FL370, but you walked right into that one.

You need to have your guard up with Bill. ;)

whoops my bad.


can i say my bad? i'm still coming to terms with the fact if they remade Back to thr Future in 3 years that going from 2015 to 1985 is the same amount of time as going from 1985 to 1955. geeish.

Where's my damn flying DeLorean, and Mr. Fusion?

Nu