New DAL MEC Chairman / MEC / 2 for 2
 

What are the impressions of other DAL pilots so far on communications from the MEC via the new Chairman?

I have yet to be convinced that everyone on the MEC is motivated by the same things, but this is encouraging. I've been optimistic about the choice the MEC made in MD, and so far so good, IMO. The two letters have been just about right: smart and cognizant of our the environment we're in (including the company), but focused on the pilots and the gains we must achieve. I've heard enough about the company, and I'm glad we're talking more about us.

It's also interesting to me that he spoke about us as a new group. To be perfectly honest, I don't particularly like or enjoy some of the changes that make me feel like a "hybrid" of two airlines. I'd rather be just Delta. I'd also like to have meals just like Mom used to cook them every night. I'd like to think we didn't go through CH11, or a merger, but we did. There is a lot to contemplate, if you feel a little nostalgic, and you want to think about the integration of two cultures. But so little to be gained, concretely speaking. So part of me didn't particularly enjoy having MD quote the 54 Chairman as saying we're neither one, nor the other. But we do need a MEC that can get us beyond the novelty of the merger, and a Chairman that can articulate this. This is one of the first letters in a long time that makes me feel like there is leadership at the MEC level that has a bit of ambition for us, and requires me to do my part.

Also noteworthy to me is the fact that he elected to visit based on and around the holidays.

So far, then, 2 for 2 on the letters, 3 for 3 if you look at actions and words.

I agree wholeheartedly....and in light of the company's recent shenanigans wrt 117, and I found this message very welcome:

"....I want your MEC’s position understood by each and every pilot on this property: We believe our PWA to be inviolable, and it only changes by mutual agreement between the pilot’s bargaining agent (ALPA) and Delta Air Lines. Neither side is empowered to unilaterally change the protections afforded us under our contract..............."

Agreed. Maybe the best message I have seen come out of DALPA in a very long time!

I am encouraged by his words. But we need results.

I'm encouraged by SOME of his words. But I'm also very discouraged by his failure to articulate a clear objective, i.e. restoration. I'll be amazed if there is any attempt to set the bar much higher than what we experienced with C2012. We've still got essentially the same bunch behind the scenes in DALPA. And from what I've heard, MD doesn't seem to have any intent to change that. Doesn't give me any warm and fuzzy feelings that things will be substantially different going forward.

I agree, actions speak louder than words. Do something to show me you're not a SSDD guy & I'll be impressed. Like a hefty pay raise after all those profits. :D

While I wanted to see stronger verbage WRT the 117 situation, what has been said so far is acceptable I guess….depending on the results. This is a huge leverage opportunity and whatever we get out of this needs to go directly to those it effects the most. This is mostly a reserve pilot issue and therefore any gain for whatever relief we give towards a mutually workable solution needs to go to reserve pilots, not be used as a piggy bank slush fund for special empires. This will be watched very closely. The end result here needs to make life better for reserrve pilots and not go towards a 6th week of vacation for 26 year pilots or some new way to trip park for double time or whatever.

As for MD, its still way, way too early to criticize in light of everything that's happened to bring his ascension about. And IMO its unfair to be upset that he hasn't jumped out of the gate screaming about a Cadillac-a-month restoration goal. We're not even at the early openers yet. He hasn't even had time to complete the initial base visits and walked right into the company attempting to rewrite our contract by memo to provide relief for something they refused to plan for that they knew was coming for years.

Oh they were smart enough to get that 7th short call, you know, juuuuust for the international categories to provide relief from SC going from 24 to 14 hours…even though domestic pilots for some reason were included in it. Turns out that was a huge relief valve from the realities of 117. For the rest they just issue a memo making up a fantasy leash of 2 hours? Whatever. All eyes on MD right now need to be watching how this plays out. It not only doesn't matter if someone talks "restoration" then allows our contract to be abrogated by management memo, but it would pretty much cancel it out.

I agree with Gloopy's post.

I don't have the two letters in front of me, but I thought he spoke about the direction in which we need to go.

Some view the letters through templates so tight, that only their own letters with MD's signature would satisfy them. And let's face it, any one pilot's expectation has the weight of one out of all of us. The group's expectations are a composite, and probably not summarized in buzzwords.

I do suspect the group in general wants much more to show for, in light of our contributions and past sacrifices.

I also feel that it's too early to judge, and results will be more important than tone, but I do feel the tone is much better than what we've gotten from the MEC under recent chairmen.

Don't mean to hijack your thread about MD Sinkr8 but since it seems to be about Dalpa's response to the 117 negotiations too...........has any one else read the Council 54 piece put out yesterday? With the last few letters on this subject, I'm getting the distinct impression that cooperative engagement is on life support.....

Denny

Be careful what you ask for Gloopy, if they make Reserve too nice, you won't be able to hold it!

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...uciho2_500.gif

But srsly, long before this becomes a matter of any current or future group "getting something" that's a net gain over today, we first have to use whatever leverage/capital we have to fix the issues that this has caused and created to the reserve pilots it effects the most. The new acknowledgement issues, day one reports and "leash" times are huge issues that need to be addressed long before we get into empire building.

Asking reserve pilots (who rarely "break guarantee) to take one for the team to get door pay for line holders is all well and good, but only after the reserve issues that 117 has created and the concessions the company is trying to force on reserves have been satisfactorily solved.

RSV isn't just a JR/SR issue. It goes from new hire all the way up to 747A. We currently have a huge reserve problem that requires a reserve solution before we can then use it to "fund" other things.

I think you are right on the cooperative engagement. Game on

Here are the last two paragraphs of 54's letter. Jud!!!!

The professional aviators of Delta have clawed their way back from bankruptcy, provided leadership through the historic merger, and enabled Delta to achieve profits approaching $2.6 billion last year. Both pilots and management must adhere to the negotiated agreement or the FAR 117 rules, whichever document is the most restrictive. There have been changes to the FARs that are more restrictive to our duty day and our capability to respond to mandatory company communications during our FAR-mandated rest periods. Please keep the MEC communication documents and FAR interpretations handy. Remember that the Delta pilots have empowered their union leadership to negotiate on their behalf when necessary to make appropriate changes to the PWA. These changes will not create or lower our pilots’ quality of life, nor impact our pay in a negative manner.



Neither side can force a change in the PWA without negotiating a mutually acceptable agreement. It is imperative that each individual Delta pilot not engage in any action that would be seen as change from past practice. The current PWA language permits you to either turn your phone off at night on long call to get proper rest, or answer the call immediately to know what your next assignment is. If your action puts you in the situation that management has determined to be a CPO-reviewable event with possible pay implication, your union will be there to defend and uphold your contractual rights. Where we believe a PWA violation has occurred and we cannot reach agreement, we will use the grievance process.

Hi Denny. No hijack. Constructive engagement is a strategy, not a religion. It shouldn't be viewed, IMO as a digital terms (0 or 1), but as an analog proposition. The degree of engagement and cooperation within a relationship is bound to vary.

Smart and calm always trump stupid and angry, but conciliatory doesn't always win the day.

I would also caution us not get myopic on just the Reserve part of 117. The VA JV just got started last week. Are we talking about production balances?

We will be seeing a lot more reroutes for line holders under 117. We should get premium pay for anything one minute past our original time. You are basically on reserve even as a lineholder. As of now, there really is no penalty to the company to reroute us.

Greenslip pay until back on original rotation. Otherwise, everyone is on reserve.

Absolutely. Irop definition and premium reroute pay exceptions are totally unacceptable as they currently stand. We must strive to financially disincentivize those practices.

Agree that there are a lot of "balls" being juggled, and we've got to keep our eye on each of them, lest the company slip a roofie into our drinks.

Also agree with Gloopy that 117 fixes need to focus on reserve qol.

It does feel that we're at a crossroads ref: "constructive engagement." Good.

And I agree with you. It is a strategy to be used as needed and it has helped both us and the company in he past. Now for the "but for" test. But for the SD memo, I think this might have been solved already. I think that memo was a company shot across the bow that doesn't bode well for future contract negotiations. I don't know, maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Denny

I'm fine with that.

The last contract didn't yield results anywhere close to commensurate with the company's success. It's time to try something else.

I'd like to see a similar shot across the bow from DALPA. We need to "put on our backpacks" and put the company on notice that we are not rolling over again.

You're not staying humble enough.:D

We are all going to need much bigger back packs, to carry all the humble. I wonder if I can payroll deduct a new back pack?

Oh, wait, I think we've already paid for many new backpacks, and all the humble we can swallow.

If DALPA wanted to, they could do that right now. The acknowledgement piece of the contract alone as it pertains to 117 would melt the reserve force down.