Delta Representation Discussion
09-07-2013 | 08:08 AM
#131
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
For johnso29:
Carl
All differences aside, it is amazing what can be achieved when you have a mutually respectful relationship with management. Here is another example:
Southwest Airlines pilots didn't like it when they saw Southwest's name on an AirTran Airways jet last month, said it violated their contract.
But wait -- this has a happy ending.
In that photo above, see that little circle on the front of the AirTran jet, the one that says Southwest Airlines around the top of the circle? That's the jet that carried Southwest and AirTran people from Dallas to Atlanta on May 2, the date that Southwest bought AirTran.
The problem is, Southwest's contract with its pilots doesn't let it put its name on other airlines' aircraft. As is typical in the scope clauses in pilot contracts, the one for Southwest's pilots says they are supposed to fly planes with Southwest's name on it.
As a result, the Southwest Airlines Pilots' Association filed a grievance covering that flight and the other 13 that AirTran jet made with the Southwest decal on it.
This is where the story differs from a lot of union-management disputes.
"Our pilots have been raising money to buy the Ronald McDonald House of Dallas a new van in Herb Kelleher's honor. We've raised enough for 3 thus far," wrote SWAPA's Neal Hanks in an email. "But that's not particularly interesting."
What is interesting is the solution.
"To resolve this grievance, SWAPA and the Company decided to add up the average pilot costs for those 14 legs, totaling $13,000 and have the Company donate that money to our RMHD van fund," he wrote.
Hanks called it "another example of the positive and collaborative relationship between Southwest Airlines and its pilots union."
Pilot grievance at Southwest Airlines turns into a good deed | Airline Biz Blog | dallasnews.com
Southwest Airlines pilots didn't like it when they saw Southwest's name on an AirTran Airways jet last month, said it violated their contract.
But wait -- this has a happy ending.
In that photo above, see that little circle on the front of the AirTran jet, the one that says Southwest Airlines around the top of the circle? That's the jet that carried Southwest and AirTran people from Dallas to Atlanta on May 2, the date that Southwest bought AirTran.
The problem is, Southwest's contract with its pilots doesn't let it put its name on other airlines' aircraft. As is typical in the scope clauses in pilot contracts, the one for Southwest's pilots says they are supposed to fly planes with Southwest's name on it.
As a result, the Southwest Airlines Pilots' Association filed a grievance covering that flight and the other 13 that AirTran jet made with the Southwest decal on it.
This is where the story differs from a lot of union-management disputes.
"Our pilots have been raising money to buy the Ronald McDonald House of Dallas a new van in Herb Kelleher's honor. We've raised enough for 3 thus far," wrote SWAPA's Neal Hanks in an email. "But that's not particularly interesting."
What is interesting is the solution.
"To resolve this grievance, SWAPA and the Company decided to add up the average pilot costs for those 14 legs, totaling $13,000 and have the Company donate that money to our RMHD van fund," he wrote.
Hanks called it "another example of the positive and collaborative relationship between Southwest Airlines and its pilots union."
Pilot grievance at Southwest Airlines turns into a good deed | Airline Biz Blog | dallasnews.com
09-07-2013 | 08:09 AM
#132
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
09-07-2013 | 08:16 AM
#133
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
This is an "anonymous" board. One of your whale boys is a prime culprit though, I'll leave it at that. Of course you will disagree, because you both drink the Caplinger kool-aid. That is why I said we should agree to disagree.
I'll tell you this though. You get rid of that *******, and I might be a little interested in the message. Until then, not so much.
I'll tell you this though. You get rid of that *******, and I might be a little interested in the message. Until then, not so much.
09-07-2013 | 08:20 AM
#134
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
The Delta/NWA merger, and the XJ/9E/9L merger were no different than the Nicolau award. The only reason DAL/NWA didn't detonate like USair did, is because DAL and NWA were relatively equal. Pinnacle is probably about to detonate after our next few realigns when hundreds of former Pinnacle guys are downgraded while Colgan guys get upgraded.
The way ALPA merger policy is written, guarantees that there will be an arbitrated award. Arbitrated awards are based on the equipment you are on at the time of the merger, and not what your career expectations are. The only way you can prevent this from happening is having an independent union that is hostile to the other merging group.
For example, lets say you guys merge with us at Endeavor. ALPA would initiate the PID and we would start negotiations on how the ISL will be put together. Using ALPA merger policy framework, a list will be created that puts the regional pilots at the bottom of the list, as it should be. HOWEVER, if the regional guys don't agree to it, it goes to binding arbitration, where it becomes an equipment merger. Then all bets are off on how that would go. The only way to preserve your seniority as a Delta pilot is to sue the regional guys in court to keep us at the bottom of the list. Since we are both ALPA, you can't sue us, since you sign a legally binding contract beforehand not to do this. You would have to form an independent union to protect yourselves from us beforehand. IF you don't do this, I WILL wind up senior to you on the integrated list.
The way ALPA merger policy is written, guarantees that there will be an arbitrated award. Arbitrated awards are based on the equipment you are on at the time of the merger, and not what your career expectations are. The only way you can prevent this from happening is having an independent union that is hostile to the other merging group.
For example, lets say you guys merge with us at Endeavor. ALPA would initiate the PID and we would start negotiations on how the ISL will be put together. Using ALPA merger policy framework, a list will be created that puts the regional pilots at the bottom of the list, as it should be. HOWEVER, if the regional guys don't agree to it, it goes to binding arbitration, where it becomes an equipment merger. Then all bets are off on how that would go. The only way to preserve your seniority as a Delta pilot is to sue the regional guys in court to keep us at the bottom of the list. Since we are both ALPA, you can't sue us, since you sign a legally binding contract beforehand not to do this. You would have to form an independent union to protect yourselves from us beforehand. IF you don't do this, I WILL wind up senior to you on the integrated list.
09-07-2013 | 08:22 AM
#135
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl
09-07-2013 | 08:39 AM
#136
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Wow. You agree with Kingsley that the current movement for an independent union at Delta is a scourge.
That is such an extremist position on your part that I really have no desire to continue this discussion with you. Your agenda now is clear and one that you've tried to hide...until now.
For the record, myself and nobody I know considers ALPA a scourge. I think that those kind of hyperbolic words (condoned by you) actually serves to produce more DPA members...so the floor is yours and J29's etc.
Over and out.
Carl
That is such an extremist position on your part that I really have no desire to continue this discussion with you. Your agenda now is clear and one that you've tried to hide...until now.
For the record, myself and nobody I know considers ALPA a scourge. I think that those kind of hyperbolic words (condoned by you) actually serves to produce more DPA members...so the floor is yours and J29's etc.
Over and out.
Carl
Using the definition of "scourge" provided by you, I agree that the organization does great harm to the group in terms of leverage for the Delta pilots, because we are lingering way beyond the time when this needed to be settled. A DPA that tries is fair, a DPA that fails to meet it's objectives but drags this thing three years further, is certainly a scourge, in terms of strategy and leadership.
On the other hand, I also believe KR's message is incomplete. I think the best, and most lasting impact of the DPA effort should be meaningful soul-searching, yielding a more basic advocacy for pilot issues, and better communication.
In terms of individuals supporting their preferred agent, I agree that we need to be civil. There is plenty of evidence on APC that we haven't been, but I'm trying to make this discussion more meaningful. We are talking about convincing lurkers on the basis of our respective arguments. So, yes, KR called the DPA a scourge. We all got the letter. What else do we have, that's actually compelling?
Last edited by Sink r8; 09-07-2013 at 08:55 AM.
09-07-2013 | 08:52 AM
#138
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
The Delta/NWA merger, and the XJ/9E/9L merger were no different than the Nicolau award. The only reason DAL/NWA didn't detonate like USair did, is because DAL and NWA were relatively equal. Pinnacle is probably about to detonate after our next few realigns when hundreds of former Pinnacle guys are downgraded while Colgan guys get upgraded.
The way ALPA merger policy is written, guarantees that there will be an arbitrated award. Arbitrated awards are based on the equipment you are on at the time of the merger, and not what your career expectations are. The only way you can prevent this from happening is having an independent union that is hostile to the other merging group.
For example, lets say you guys merge with us at Endeavor. ALPA would initiate the PID and we would start negotiations on how the ISL will be put together. Using ALPA merger policy framework, a list will be created that puts the regional pilots at the bottom of the list, as it should be. HOWEVER, if the regional guys don't agree to it, it goes to binding arbitration, where it becomes an equipment merger. Then all bets are off on how that would go. The only way to preserve your seniority as a Delta pilot is to sue the regional guys in court to keep us at the bottom of the list. Since we are both ALPA, you can't sue us, since you sign a legally binding contract beforehand not to do this. You would have to form an independent union to protect yourselves from us beforehand. IF you don't do this, I WILL wind up senior to you on the integrated list.
The way ALPA merger policy is written, guarantees that there will be an arbitrated award. Arbitrated awards are based on the equipment you are on at the time of the merger, and not what your career expectations are. The only way you can prevent this from happening is having an independent union that is hostile to the other merging group.
For example, lets say you guys merge with us at Endeavor. ALPA would initiate the PID and we would start negotiations on how the ISL will be put together. Using ALPA merger policy framework, a list will be created that puts the regional pilots at the bottom of the list, as it should be. HOWEVER, if the regional guys don't agree to it, it goes to binding arbitration, where it becomes an equipment merger. Then all bets are off on how that would go. The only way to preserve your seniority as a Delta pilot is to sue the regional guys in court to keep us at the bottom of the list. Since we are both ALPA, you can't sue us, since you sign a legally binding contract beforehand not to do this. You would have to form an independent union to protect yourselves from us beforehand. IF you don't do this, I WILL wind up senior to you on the integrated list.
Delta owns Endeavor outright, correct?
If we're not merged, it's because we don't have to. If we wanted to jointly petition our management (and they'd have to agree), we wouldn't do it without a negotiated agreement. IOW, you can't force us to merge under any policy.
But let's say you could.
In that case, the merger policy sets standards for "fair and equitable" (career expectations, longevity, status and category). That's still better than just "fair and equitable".
Whether considering your hypothetical, or a more likely scenario (Alaska, for example), and when making representation decisions, Delta pilots (and this is purely a matter for Delta pilots) probably wouldn't logically list "dumping the merger policy" as a pro-DPA argument. That makes no sense.
09-07-2013 | 09:03 AM
#139
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
I'm going to ask a stupid question, and maybe sound condescending, but that's not my intent: I just want to confirm this...
Delta owns Endeavor outright, correct?
If we're not merged, it's because we don't have to. If we wanted to jointly petition our management (and they'd have to agree), we wouldn't do it without a negotiated agreement. IOW, you can't force us to merge under any policy.
But let's say you could.
In that case, the merger policy sets standards for "fair and equitable" (career expectations, longevity, status and category). That's still better than just "fair and equitable".
When considering a more likely scenario (Alaska, for example), and making representation decisions, Delta pilots (and this is purely a matter for Delta pilots) probably wouldn't logically list "dumping the merger policy" as a pro-DPA argument. That makes no sense.
Delta owns Endeavor outright, correct?
If we're not merged, it's because we don't have to. If we wanted to jointly petition our management (and they'd have to agree), we wouldn't do it without a negotiated agreement. IOW, you can't force us to merge under any policy.
But let's say you could.
In that case, the merger policy sets standards for "fair and equitable" (career expectations, longevity, status and category). That's still better than just "fair and equitable".
When considering a more likely scenario (Alaska, for example), and making representation decisions, Delta pilots (and this is purely a matter for Delta pilots) probably wouldn't logically list "dumping the merger policy" as a pro-DPA argument. That makes no sense.
This is the reason ALPA outsources to gain max profits, they don't care about who is flying the plane, as long as it is an ALPA pilot.
09-07-2013 | 09:16 AM
#140
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
You are 100% correct on all points, the problem is, ALPA merger policy is not actually used in ALPA merger policy, it is set up to fail, that way the union doesn't take the blame. If you merge with say Alaska, you must be hostile to the Alaskan group to protect your seniority. However, since you use ALPA policy first, you have to work together. This is the ultimate flaw in ALPA. No one is debating that ALPA is the absolute best at contract negotiations and other services. The problem is ALPA doesn't care who is in the seat. They may be able to negotiate $500 an hour for a wide body captain, but they don't care if it is you, or me sitting in that seat. You better believe SWAPA cares whether or not a former SWA pilot is sitting in the correct seat. Does that make sense?
This is the reason ALPA outsources to gain max profits, they don't care about who is flying the plane, as long as it is an ALPA pilot.
This is the reason ALPA outsources to gain max profits, they don't care about who is flying the plane, as long as it is an ALPA pilot.
I'm trying to see your argument, but I only had time to read your post once, and I really don't see what you mean. "ALPA" doesn't decide who is in the seat: the arbitrators do, and the respective MEC's/MC's present the case strictly for their pilots, not for ALPA or anyone else.
Are you making another argument, that ALPA doesn't favor mainline drivers or RJ drivers by serving as the association for both? They don't have to: each branch represents their own interests.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
