So you make assumptions to the contrary? Good idea!!

I didn't say management was DALPA's "owner".
That's your interpretation of the relationship.

Interesting. Insightful.

Sure, if you say so.

Sure such situations exist. But before we publicly get nasty we at least need to get privately nasty. If the private fighting doesn't get us anywhere then it would be time to up the ante. I would prefer we save it for the big moments, Section 6, etc.

Even though I disagree with a lot of what you post here, at least I respect your passion. Keep on caring!

All the forum back and forth is fun but my real purpose in all this rhetorical sparring is just to try and convince a few of the lurkers out there (and by extension, their reps) that DALPA should perhaps be slightly more aggressive in their approach to negotiations.

We have been successful in achieving some contract improvements and I congratulate our guys for that, but its my opinion that we left quite a bit of money on the table in C2012. We settled for less than we deserved and less than was available.

It seems like the non-confrontational approach has just about run its course. If we want to be compensated on the same level as other professionals with commensurate skill, training and responsibilities then we are going to have to exert a little more pressure on management than we have recently.

I hope the new negotiating committee will agree. I hope the reps will vote that way.

We deserve more money and the corporation can afford to pay us. But they're not going to do it out of the kindness of their hearts. Constructive engagement has been positive in many respects and I don't want to totally abandon it. Nobody is advocating "burn the house down" tactics, but we are going to have to show them that we can at least turn up the heat a little bit. Its been so long that right now I don't think they believe we remember how to do that. The pendulum has swung too far. They don't fear us at all, and that's not healthy for our futures.

That's exactly how I feel. No one wants to burn the place down. But we must not allow our expectations to be managed down again.

I hope we don't forget how frustrating it was to be misled and manipulated into accepting an inadequate contract--only for the company to forecast record profits for the duration of said contract.

If we can't make sizable gains now, we never will.

Agreed. Well said.

I for one do not feel as though I was misled or manipulated. I attended several road shows and saw a clear picture of what the TA was and what it was not. With all of that, and under the circumstance at the time, I voted yes and would do so again.

That said, I agree that we will need to exert every piece of leverage we can muster to obtain substantial gains the next time around. This will be a different circumstance, and by necessity a different result. Both the industry and Delta's profitability (the one actually in the books, not merely projected) will provide us with a much stronger case for substantial gains, and we should accept nothing less.

Sure can't tell from the vast majority of your posts....

Election results are in:

John Morgado, Chairman
Heiko Kallenbach, Member
Matt Coons, Member

The two members are holdovers from C2012, and the new Chairman is the current Merger Committee Chairman and prior Contract Administration Committee Chairman.

A committee comprised of tons of experience. May the force be with them.