What exactly would you expect him to say?

Management's goal is to get this TA passed, plain and simple.

I don't believe for a second that we are looking at the actual plan "B", but you apparently think we are.

Bill.
I don't live that way. I look at language and see where it could fail, and where it can help. Consolidation is going to continue, and depending on who gets in the the White House in November, as well as how far the Euro Zone falls, will very much determine the first transnational moves. We as a group and a bargaining agent need to look at these as very real possibilities. Some of it can be protected though our PWA, and some of it cannot. It has to do with world recognition of labor law across boarders. With AF financially being where they are, DAL would be the logical first mover. Look at our PWA from that context and see what needs to be fixed or shored up.

Just because you keep saying that doesn't make it true.

I have never said that, ever.

Last time:
My "agenda" is for Transatlantic JV flying cuts to be shared.
If we are going to cut capacity,
I want the AFKLM/AZ guys to cut the same amount.

That concept is called downside protection.

If we cut EASKs I want AFKLM/AZ to cut EASKs by the same amount.

• Why is that so hard to understand?
• Why is that somehow controversial?
• Why would any Delta pilot be in favor of anything less?

Cheers
George

BTW No I'm not Happy because here is the June 21 GDS change for Winter 2012:

Alfa, meet me at camera three:

• You question my motives and claim I made the slides for the DPA. Those are tall accusations and they are without merit.
  
• Unlike you, I have actually voted in a representation election to be represented by ALPA. I have seen first hand the ugly tactics of MC's former law firm.
  
• My uncle Wally who passed away earlier this year worked at ALPA National for 40 years. So being ALPA is "in the family."
  
• I have not worked with, worked for or coordinated anything with the DPA, it just false and without merit to suggest otherwise.
  
• Lastly, if we have gotten to the point where a critical analysis of JV flying cuts, made mostly by Delta pilots and not shared equally by the other guys, is somehow anti ALPA, we are in deep trouble as a Union.

If you want to discuss the slides, I have provided answers here: http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/de...ml#post1219717

Cheers
George

Ok, Alfa, show me the 15% cuts for AFKLM/AZ this winter...

• What AFKLM/AZ routes are being cut?
• What routes is AFKLM/AZ eliminating?
• What is your source?

Cheers
George

George, Thanks for clarifying your stance and sorry about your Uncle. I will go back and look closer at your other posts. I tend to agree with your JV arguments but that is one of the reasons I voted yes, I thought the protections were an improvement and a STEP in the right direction.

While I don't put much stock in "The Manager", it was overheard in the ATL crew room directly from an ALPA type that he expects it to pass 55/45 or there abouts.

That puts a no vote just possible on the outside of the margin of error, but he also may be viewing it from a ATL perspective. There wasn't any kind of official polling information mentioned, so it may have just been a WAG on his part.

My own straw poll shows failing 60/40, BUT, thats a non-ATL perspective, which is subject to the same kind of error.

Nu

Not part of the AF/KLM/AZ JV however...

Delta just announced that DTW-HKG will be suspended in August.

Where did I say you created these slides for DPA or you worked for DPA? I said they were widely spread by DPA and that is a fact. Certainly you did not create them just to have something to do, in fact you intended for them to be widely circulated so don't get all dewy eyed. If you didn't know that DPA would take your slides and recirculate them then you are naive.

Every one of those slides is based on bad math, bad analysis, and mostly outright deception. For example you tout the benefits of how Southwest pilots rejected a TA and then get a different one a few months later. Yet you fail to do any analysis on the value of that TA versus the rejected one. The second one was worse. Pure and simple. You give some quote, severed from it's context, from the SWAPA President talking about the few items that improved in the new agreement, yet you failed to discuss even one of the shortfalls of the new agreement. Less pay, less guaranteed growth, and many other items that left the new agreement vastly under value from the first deal. Did you mention that the pay increases generated by that new TA were 0,3,2,0? Nope.

Every slide you created has the same kinds of double talk, false analysis, and deception. Every one. So of course you are allowed to voice your opinions. Others are allowed to judge that work. If you are going to put out information like that, expect to be called on it.

As for the JV. Tell me in your own words how we came to being 47.5% of the JV. How did that number change in MOU 16? What will it become in the future? Let's see if you are better at telling the whole story this time.

This from the same hacks that gave us those disingenuous "negotiators' notepads" filling up recycling bins in all the lounges.

Please use thinner paper next time. Then it will feel better when I'm wiping.