What will it Take?
07-02-2012 | 02:50 PM
#121
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Actually, it is and thanks for the correction. I was looking at the language as a stand alone, not in reference to what our fleet is or isnt, and those 717 would be SNB's that are "new" to us.
It being clear as mud is my concern. Probably not an issue, but one would never know.
It being clear as mud is my concern. Probably not an issue, but one would never know.
That is what I thought at first also, but there are NC notes to go with it and I reiterated the question to make sure.
Clear as mud for us, and clear as mud for lawyers are very different situations.
Ever want to have an attorney look at a Vol. 1 and see if he understands it?
Clear as mud for us, and clear as mud for lawyers are very different situations.
Ever want to have an attorney look at a Vol. 1 and see if he understands it?
But it's a moot point if they get all of the 76-seaters they're allowed through the FL B717s and probably at the production rate Bombardier is willing to put out.
Now, as far as I see once we are all one happy family then I don't see anything that stops them from being counted in the ratio so they'll more than beat the 1.56 ratio requirement. Which provides the Company the flexibility they'll need moving forward.
07-02-2012 | 03:54 PM
#122
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
There doesn't appear to be any penalty for management if they don't comply with the ratios or the parking of 50 seaters. While management is required to have DCI stop flying those jets, if DCI claims financial hardship over that decision and says no, then Delta is released from that requirement.
There is no penalty delineated in the PWA. That's not to mean one would not be assessed by an arbitrator. Financial hardship and the economy are both specifically prohibited. (The term “circumstance overwhich the Company does not have control” will not include the price of fuel or other supplies, the price of aircraft, the state of the economy, the financial state of the Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company’s then-current operations.) Our agreement is not with DCI, it's with Delta Air Lines. If a DCI carrier is experiencing financial hardship, it's not our problem. Delta is NOT released from that requirement to maintain the ratio.
What section 1 should have said is that any pilot or aircraft operating in violation to this scope agreement immediately falls under the terms of this Delta CBA, and will be added to the bottom of the Delta SL.
I know you want to get to mainline but the only influence (small that it is) we have is with Delta Air Lines. Not with any DCI carriers. There is absolutely no way what you suggest could be negotiated and enforced even if it was negotiated. We would be binding a third party who is not a signatore of the agreement.
There is no penalty delineated in the PWA. That's not to mean one would not be assessed by an arbitrator. Financial hardship and the economy are both specifically prohibited. (The term “circumstance overwhich the Company does not have control” will not include the price of fuel or other supplies, the price of aircraft, the state of the economy, the financial state of the Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company’s then-current operations.) Our agreement is not with DCI, it's with Delta Air Lines. If a DCI carrier is experiencing financial hardship, it's not our problem. Delta is NOT released from that requirement to maintain the ratio.
What section 1 should have said is that any pilot or aircraft operating in violation to this scope agreement immediately falls under the terms of this Delta CBA, and will be added to the bottom of the Delta SL.
I know you want to get to mainline but the only influence (small that it is) we have is with Delta Air Lines. Not with any DCI carriers. There is absolutely no way what you suggest could be negotiated and enforced even if it was negotiated. We would be binding a third party who is not a signatore of the agreement.
Denny
07-02-2012 | 04:01 PM
#123
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
I would think we could just rely on 1.B.43 and 1.B.16 alone and just say until SOC none of HAL's aircraft belong to the Company and therefore don't count.
Agree, that's probably what would happen.
But it's a moot point if they get all of the 76-seaters they're allowed through the FL B717s and probably at the production rate Bombardier is willing to put out.
Now, as far as I see once we are all one happy family then I don't see anything that stops them from being counted in the ratio so they'll more than beat the 1.56 ratio requirement. Which provides the Company the flexibility they'll need moving forward.
If we did merge with HA, we would need to negotiate a JCBA before we are one big happy family. I'm betting the ratio would be addressed in the negotiation and it would at least be a wash if not better.
Agree, that's probably what would happen.
But it's a moot point if they get all of the 76-seaters they're allowed through the FL B717s and probably at the production rate Bombardier is willing to put out.
Now, as far as I see once we are all one happy family then I don't see anything that stops them from being counted in the ratio so they'll more than beat the 1.56 ratio requirement. Which provides the Company the flexibility they'll need moving forward.
If we did merge with HA, we would need to negotiate a JCBA before we are one big happy family. I'm betting the ratio would be addressed in the negotiation and it would at least be a wash if not better.
Denny
07-02-2012 | 04:39 PM
#124
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
Denny, that's the basis of labor law, anyone operating outside of your scope contract is a Delta ALPA pilot by law. The corruption of the union is why it is not enforced. One of the most solid scope contracts in the business is JetBlue, since if they organize, not matter how fragmented the company is, they are all under the same CBA. This would be a very different career if the union actually did its job vs selling jobs for money.
07-02-2012 | 04:46 PM
#125
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
I'm sure, but if we add their 717s and B763 non-ER types to the fold that we'd be around 1.9 on the ratio. Anything less (considering this is a few years out) we'd be allowing, cough, cough... shrinkage?
But notice a jump from 1.56 to 1.9 is not growth for PMDAL as we add PMHAL. DAL and HAL? That will be entertaining.
Anyways, what we reluctantly are forced to do is give up on growing back to where we were at the merger in 08 and at least secure the hull size if we merge with HAL. Put that number in writing or something outsourced gets parked.
If we merge with Alaska, shoot me. Sounds like that's just inviting the merge, shrink, rinse, repeat. It won't be good for anyone. But at least SEA will be a hub for you Denny?
But notice a jump from 1.56 to 1.9 is not growth for PMDAL as we add PMHAL. DAL and HAL? That will be entertaining.
Anyways, what we reluctantly are forced to do is give up on growing back to where we were at the merger in 08 and at least secure the hull size if we merge with HAL. Put that number in writing or something outsourced gets parked.
If we merge with Alaska, shoot me. Sounds like that's just inviting the merge, shrink, rinse, repeat. It won't be good for anyone. But at least SEA will be a hub for you Denny?
07-02-2012 | 05:07 PM
#126
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
BTW, no more naked George.... just had to edit that out!
07-02-2012 | 05:09 PM
#127
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
07-02-2012 | 05:14 PM
#128
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
What can I say I love well written easy to find language; one place right place
I'll give a few or the negotiators a call after the holiday. Those notes are key. Now if we would just video tape interpretation.
07-02-2012 | 05:19 PM
#129
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
I would love to see the negotiator notes on everything. Probably would produce about 500 pages of questions but would clear up some too.
What can I say I love well written easy to find language; one place right place
I'll give a few or the negotiators a call after the holiday. Those notes are key. Now if we would just video tape interpretation.
What can I say I love well written easy to find language; one place right place
I'll give a few or the negotiators a call after the holiday. Those notes are key. Now if we would just video tape interpretation.
07-02-2012 | 05:23 PM
#130
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Oh we could. The lawyering of the PWA subparts was something I looked at but could be drawn in to question with out negotiators notes. Those are key.
As for one place, well, air watch is a great idea but I do not like the end user agreeme that we actually agree too.
As for one place, well, air watch is a great idea but I do not like the end user agreeme that we actually agree too.
