Is the "call in honest" in the NWA contract? When it first came out, it was just a "policy" that Ed Davidson (the DTW Chief Pilot) got the VP of Flight Ops (back when he was a real pilot) to sign. If it's in the contract, it was put in later so maybe there is still hope.

Oh by the way, that is how the hats became optional and the leather jacket added too......just a stroke of the pen in the Flight Ops Manual by "Delete Pete".

Ferd,

I'm gonna tell you the same thing I tell the guys over on our forums. I have never brought pay into this. It is all about QOL.. and this POS does nothing to better that aspect of our careers. If this TA is really that important.. as Carl's alter ego would say "How about .. you know.. a little somethin for the effort" ... and I will already have total consciousness on my deathbed thank you... There are QOL issues that cost the company little if anything at all that haven't been discussed here. A long time ago, a wise old captain told me.. "In up times you talk about money.. in down times you talk about QOL" I see nothing to indicate that that has been accomplished here.

Everyone needs to just read ALL the information that is being provided by the MECs. They did a good job considering what we have to work with IMHO>

First of all, Gunga Galunga.

Secondly, I understand your problems with the TA. I really agree with that wise old Captain and his quote also. I've been trying to put myself in Anderson's shoes right now as I develop my next moves on the chess board should my pilots really vote this TA down. Here is what I would think HE is thinking:

1. An enormous sense of betrayal. Anderson would probably feel stabbed in the back by signing off on LOA 19 to secure DAL pilot's gains and show the Wall Street crowd he is serious about merging the two airlines, just to have that same group of pilots vote down a TA that will split the two pilot groups and endanger the synergies he has promised the investment community.

2. A viable "response" to voting down the TA would be to delay the Date of Corporate Closing (DCC) - or whatever the term that was used as the trigger for LOA 19. By delaying the activation of LOA 19, neither pilot group sees any gains and Delta saves money at a crucial time. DOJ due diligence and ultimate approval can still take place, but Delta can simply SAY: "even though we are operating as a combined carrier, we don't consider ourselves CLOSED until the single operating certificate" or any other number of excuses/rationalizations.

3. Wait a suitable period of time for DALPA to scold its members and remind them they would already be seeing pay raises if they were all not so stubborn.

4. Try again for another TA after having gained months of not having to pay LOA 19 wages or TA wages.

Just some loose thoughts from a budding assistant greenskeeper.

Carl

Salient points. Personally I have a difficult time feeling much for Mr. Anderson since he made more this week than you will make all year. I find that absolutely abhorrent personally, but it is neither here nor there. If I wanted to make that kind of coin, I should have checked CEO on my application instead of hourly wage earner. Some things in this industry will never change. Executives are ALWAYS entitled to make tons of cash even if the company loses money. But I digress... all in all, I do not like this POS. However that being said, I am fairly confident that it will pass... everything always does at DAL... and we will all have to live with the contract for 6 or 7 years. (by the time management starts dragging it's feet in 2012) And then I am sure they will have some other crisis that will keep us down.

Carl, I would read LOA 19. There are protections against what you mention as Anderson options including the requirement for full retro pay back to 1 Jan regardless of when the DCC occurs. I am not sure why NWA pilots see a Delta no vote as a vote against them. A no vote is a vote saying we want a better quality of life for all pilots NWA and Delta. I have still not made a final choice on my vote. I will attend a road show and then make up my mind. If I vote no however its to improve the life of every Delta pilot now and in the future which includes NWA.

If what you say is right and there is no way to stop LOA 19 even if Delta doesn't close the merger, then I guess Anderson wouldn't have that option.

The reason voting against the TA would make for interesting times would be that (apparently) LOA 19 kicks in no matter what happens. That means a nice pay bump for Delta pilots. Voting against the TA means status quo LOA 19 pay for Delta pilots, but keeps NWA pilots at the lower NWA pay scales post merger. Unless I'm missing something, a NO vote on the TA brings us back to two different pay scales possibly after the merger.

Carl

5. Anderson gives the now cooperating NWA group its own version of LOA 19 but with the gains on the JPWA. The SLI happens the same way regardless of the vote. DAL moves planes around as it feels necessary all while the DAL pilot group loses its great relationship with RA. This also further divides the NWA/DAL pilot group possibly ruining the chances of keeping this from turning into a mess like USAIR.

I think one thing we can agree on is that we need to all get informed and go to the roadshows before anyone decides what their vote will be. Some of you are saying you have already decided on your votes before you have read all the material or gone to the roadshows. Negotiating leverage goes down more and more each day fuel goes up. this deal isnt bad all things considered. I think we can agree we all want a strong New Delta that can give all of us the best shot at stability in this crazy industry. Vote as you want but at least get informed before making judgement and hope this doesnt turn into a disaster of a company like USAIR.

The really interesting thing is that the SLI will get done the same way regardless and eventually we will all be DAL pilots under 1 contract but with no more negotiating power. Voting No does nothing imho but produce bad blood. voting yes keeps a good relationship with mgmt, allows the immediate synergies, and gives ALL of us added pay and benefits.

Call it koolaid if you want but its a pretty rational stance imho.

Carl,
As your other alter ego says "Thats the fact Jack!"

LOA 19 kicks in 01 January 2009 even if DCC is later. However I would consider, as I am sure most DAL pilots would, operating two different payscales as a blown opportunity for both MEC's and a disaster in the making. The last thing we as DAL pilots should want is for you guys to be cheaper to operate, not to mention being PO'd for the next 25 years.
You guys have seen the DAL MEC true to its word seek a joint contract ASAP - like they said, and like a lot of NW pilots said they wouldn't. I believed my MEC then and I believe them know. Unfortunatley I am still troubled by the earlier reports from my same (now mostly agreed reliable MEC) that NW tried to claim close to the first 2000 spots on the list and hose the DAL pilots accordingly - as a mid seniority FO thats not something you forget.

Superpilot - you keep saying how we should continue to believe and trust the DAL MEC - does this include the reports about the earlier failed SLI negotiations?

By the way If I were King it would be top five spots NW guys - next 8 spots DAL guys next 5 NW next 8 DAL.....until the list is done. No Issac Newton differential equations required - no 26 hearings for the next 25 years, just 13000 ****ed of pilots for a few years- and then we conquer the world!

Tough crap about your retirements :rolleyes:,- tough crap about our orders:rolleyes:, thats the list live with it. 5 year fences would also be nice but too much to hope for.

Scoop

For those still curious about the other alter-ego, its from Stripes.:D

I will be honest anything to do with the initial SLI would be speculation on my part because i havent seen the official stance from either side. As far as i am concerned i am not worried about the past. From all of the documentation i have seen from BOTH mecs it looks like EVERY base was covered in regards to the SLI and the JPWA. If you read all of it everyone is protected and it makes sure that WE dont turn into the next USAIR. Thats why both sides Unanimously ratified it. They have all the facts and they both know this is whats best for the entire collective NEW DAL. This is a true opportunity to buck the trend and really make this new company an industry leader in every way and give us all the best chance of having some stability in this stupid business. Again i am not taking either side i am taking the New Delta's side.;)

I don't know about you, but I'd prefer that my union do what's best for me and my pilot group, not what's best for the "collective new DAL."

They are. Why do you feel otherwise? They did unanimously ratify it just like the NWA side did. prior to LOA 19 you felt they were doing what was best for you so what changed? Honest questions.

If you read the documentation you will realize both sides did a very good job ensuring the deal was done right. They made sure nobody would lose anything. No displacements, no lost pay, increased pay, increased stability, and a stronger company for all of us. Its going to happen one way or the other at least this way we all get more and we dont further divide the pilot group. just a thought.

Spliff..you are too funny.....'best for me and my pilot group' How long have you been working at the Old DAL? I think not long. Your motto truly is 'Semper I':)

True all.

"Semper I..."

I like it! :D

Has it ever occurred to you that what is best for the "collective new DAL" IS what's best for you and your pilot group (and mine)?

This merger is happening...period, end of story. Voting this Joint TA down would not be a good thing. Given the current crisis state of this industry it is a very good agreement and worthy of ratification. The quicker we get this thing done and move on as a combined kick-tail company the better.

Deliberately pursuing a strategy that would encourage a USAir-style mess seems bizarre to me.

I guess the ultimate question is: if we shoot this TA down, what is a superior Plan B? I don't think that there is one.

There is no better Plan B. It's just the old mentality that's a time honored play back to the days when airlines were profitable and the union members "always voted down the first contract because they can do better". We are the only US legacies that haven't announced furloughs this fall. Perhaps they're waiting behind the curtain and will be announced after the DCC. However, every month that is delayed is another month that we junior guys collect a paycheck, are able to save, possibly get closer to coming out of this abyss, etc.

My survival plan is vote Yes. I don't see how anyone could think we could do better. I would rather have $7 billion cash in the bank than half that. I would rather have a completely diversified company than lack the Asian routes or vice versa if you're NWA. People need to look around them. The world is going into a recession right now. Europe is slowing down, China's market is off 50% for the year, India and Latin America are seeing signs of pressure. Odds are, one of these areas will help lead the recovery. If we're the biggest carrier in the world we can capitalize on that versus hinging our recovery to certain markets.

Bottom line: Voting No means a trip to door C. The two sides couldn't come to an agreement months ago which was a No vote and look where that got us. A worse agreement and that was when oil was $90/barrel. What makes anyone sure we can do better with oil at $145/barrel?

Great posts! This is going to happen and whats going to give us the best shot at success for all is to put the swords down and move forward as 1 solid unified pilot group. Looking forward to it!!

The roof is falling on my head. Bla Bla Kumba yaya and on the music goes:)

If the roof is going to fall voting yes is not going to make any difference in my opinion.

Vote your beliefs and do not let the economy pressure you. The contract is for 4 years and this situation could change tomorrow for better or worse:D

I am yet to personally meet a Delta pilot who has told me he will vote for this TA. Their reasons are not always related to if they feel the TA is good or bad. It has to do more with the SLI.

The reason why the union is in no hurry to schedule a vote right now on the Delta side is because the TA would get a NO vote!

In all seriousness are you oblivious to your surroundings? By all means have a difference of opinion but at least open your eyes to whats going on around you and get informed from your MEC. Voting NO only and gives up the pay increases, synergies, pushes off the ability for DAL mgmt to give this the best shot at stability and making this the world leader airline it ciuld become.. Not to mention further divides what could be a great pilot group.

I know you probably dont care about the long term success of the new Delta since you are actively attempting to get on at Emirates. How did the open house go? Will you be leaving us?

The roof is falling. It fell on me seven years ago and lasted five years. If I can avoid being furloughed again then yes, I will vote with my beliefs. But I also actively trade in the stock market. Some sage advice that was given to me years ago is that as a trader, it doesn't matter what you think might or will happen to the market. The market doesn't care about you. It is going to do what it does. Bottom line: don't fight the market because you will lose and lose big. If the general trend of the economy is down, oil is up, etc., it doesn't matter if I think or feel we are in a bubble or that the economy could correct. Voting No on those grounds is going contrary to the market pulse and will cost big money. This downturn will last at least 12 to 24 months in this industry. Then it will be like post 9/11 a long slow recovery. So if we are tied into a contract that gives us gains, etc., over the next four years, I personally feel that is the best we can do. If in four years this merger has done what it's promised to do, then yes, we can go balls out on a new contract. Then we will have the resources and leverage to do so.

I am likely to vote yes on it, but I have some reservations.

The thing that gives me pause is the SLI framework letter; I don't like that the plan calls for negotiations for only a month before giving it to the arbitration panel. Why is it so rushed? We can't mix the fleets until we have a single operating certificate anyway, so why not spend more time in negotiations?

I voted against LOA 19; I thought that, by agreeing to those pay raises, we indicated what an acceptable compensation level would be. Lo and behold, those are the rates we see in the JPWA. Economic circumstances have changed, though, and I think that these rates are the best we're going to see.

Excellent post.

Carl

Well put .

Another great post.

The reason I want to see furloughs mitigated to the greatest extent possible, has a selfish component to it as well as an empathetic one given how many times I was furloughed. My selfish reason is that the pilots we furlough today on the NWA/DAL list are very, very well qualified. If we furlough them, they will find other jobs, UPS, FedEx, Emirates, etc. Most will NEVER come back. When things turn around and we need to hire, we'll be interviewing from a pool of candidates that couldn't get on with UPS, FedEx, Emirates, etc. I want my first officers to be the most qualified in the industry, not the most unwanted.

Our junior people are tremendously qualified - let's keep it that way, by keeping them. They will be our senior captains someday.

Carl

So true.

When CAL went into its super hiring mode several years ago I was amazed at the quality of the candidates we were receiving and have the same feelings as you do about letting them go.

Well put Carl.

I wish the CEOs would understand that as well. I envision them on their death bed achieving a state of total consciousness then realizing, crap I let all the good pilots go..................

Heyas CVG,

I agree with what you said, and your sentiments.

But just so the info is clear, voting no on the JPWA will not change the timeline for the SLI agreement. They are separate agreements.

Nu

DAL4EVER,

Right on the money...you are 100% correct!!!

My inclination is to vote yes as well. I've been working and haven't had the chance to go thru all of the different agreements. I think I will put all of my secondary feelings about what we SHOULD get and focus on what is most important to me. NO FURLOUGHS.

Can someone tell me if the "No furlough" clause we have is concrete? I have seen posted on this forum that the NEW DAL will not be able to furlough for a host of reasons, including: merger, FUEL COSTS, bad economy, ect.

If this is true, then the agreement has my yes vote. I mean really, who cares if each position gets an extra $10-$20 if you get bumped down two or three lower paying positions. Also, I feel the need to vote for the junior people on our list. Who cares if 80% of us gets a better contract if 20% of us are on the street making NOTHING and holding nothing but recall rights back to the worlds largest airlines? Only a paycheck pays the bills.

So, my question is, do we really have ironclad furlough protection language in this agreement somewhere?

New K Now (I think)

OK, you've now proved you aren't an airline pilot!

Ironclad furlough protection...that's some funny stuff!;)

Slowplay

Remembers the 1113 process way too well...and all the furloughs that happened after 9/11

Ok. There is more to life than just flying the airplane.

Of course, ANY person/Corporation can do anything they want.

But, if a Court finds that they were not acting in good faith or they materially breached a provision in an agreement, then they can award damages. Ie., lost pay.

In our case, if the Courts found that we had a provision for no furloughs--let's say for reasons of high fuel prices, and the company furloughed anyway--and the Court found that they did it because of high fuel prices, they could award pay for all those who were furloughed.

In my book, that's a better deal than all the other airlines are offering right now.

So--maybe I should rephrase--is there languange in the agreement that protects pilots from furlough for more than just the merger?

It's not in our (NWA's) 54 page agreement & I heard it was in the DAL 450+ page agreement. Is it?

New K Now (I think)

With the types of improvements NWA guys are getting from this windfall, of course you are going to be biased in favor for it. Why would any NWA guy vote it down??? NALPA stepped on its schwantz in February, but DALPA still bailed them out.

Most here seem to think that this merger is a sure thing after the TA and SLI are ironed out. Even after that, this is an extremely risky endeavor that could leave both companies worse off than before.

I'm a bit tired of listening to Pollyana-ish koolaid. This is not the cakewalk some would have us believe it is.

Unadulterated rubbish.

In what sense? Do you think the success of the merger is a given? What exactly do you take issue with?

Well put. Spaceman, I know you dont like NWA being part of your beloved big "D", however there is nothing you or I can do about it. So, my tip is to do the best to get along and not be a cancer to the new and improved Delta. Maybe it will tip my hat to you some day, if I get out of ANC. BTW, I bid for the 747SO position.

Are you talking about the windfall of using some of NWA's 3.5 billion in cash to give NWA guys and DAL guys these pay raises? Or are you only focused on the windfall of using some of DAL's 3.5 billion in cash to give NWA guys and DAL guys pay raises?

Bail who out...and with who's cash??

An NWA guy might consider voting NO on this to ensure they never had to fly with such a bitter, selfish and haughty individual such as yourself.

Keep sending those "Postcards From The Edge" there Spaceman. Nobody represents the extreme quite like you.

Carl

Judas Priest, Carl. Are you honestly going to tell me NWA pilots would have gotten these raises on your own, even with all the cash you claim your company has?

As far as NWA pilots are concerned, the "cash" you speak of might as well be monopoly money. You have no chance of seeing a dime of it--either now, or years down the road when your contract is amendable.

No. I don't think NWA would have agreed to raise our pay in the middle of a contract without some extraordinary outside event. I also don't think DAL would have agreed to LOA 19 without the extraordinary event of the pending merger with NWA and DAL's need to get SCOPE RELIEF from the DALPA contract. Do YOU honestly think you would have gotten the raises proposed in LOA 19 "on your own?" Oh... I forgot who I was addressing. You're Spaceman. Your pride and arrogance knows no bounds.

And you know this how?

You really are just flame bait Spaceman, but sometimes even flame bait needs a response.

Carl

Carl, it's not worth your breath. Spaceman has his mind made up and it's clear he thinks he is doing the right thing. I'm not exactly sure how he thinks voting this down will bring more money to the table but he certainly does. That would be great if it were true but I believe it to be pie in the sky. We shall see...