If you want another example of the half-truths you're going to get at these DALPA road shows, this is it. If the records you send are deemed insufficient, more records BEYOND your sick incident can be demanded at the sole discretion of the vendor that Delta designates. It's in the TA language.

Meaningless. The actual TA language allows for ANYONE designated by Delta.

Carl

As Harwood used to say all the time here, Hope isn't a strategy.

THIS is the language we are being URGED to vote YES on. Not "solidified" language, this language. This EXACT language. The only way to get any troublesome language "solidified" is to vote NO and renegotiate.

So since "Professor" is so troubled by some of this language, maybe he'll vote NO so we can renegotiate the problem areas?

Carl

Complete falsehood. Not in the TA language.

Carl

Absolutely false.

Carl

I've been lurking too long...

Hired at the beginning of '87, so I've been around awhile. When I got word the TA was out, I was excited, but a little apprehensive. To say that I was underwhelmed by the 2015 TA is an understatement. I've voted yes and no to previous TA's...yes on C2012. But for TA 2015, I'm giving it a solid THUMBS DOWN and will be voting NO WAY TA!

Not all wide body Capts are just looking at the $$...

Correct. That's the actual TA language.

Totally false. Demanding more info beyond your sick occurrence is at the sole discretion of whoever Delta designates.

That's the minimum. There's also nothing that would prevent Delta from pursuing termination for wrongful absence...except being represented by DALPA.

Carl

Its more than that though. The TA significantly lowers the threshold where we are required to verify. Not only is it a reduction from 100 to 75 to 80ish hours (equivalent) but the removal of the ability to pre-verify prior to the threshold makes this a double whammy.

Now we will have to verify way sooner and way more often. As for compliance, its not just a matter of you are required to verify and you just say "nah nanny boo boo" and refuse to verify, just like refusing to show for a trip, etc. Its actually worse than that. You can make your best effort to verify, but if you can't find a doctor to "verify" you indeed had an upset stomach/headache/nausea/squirts/etc 3 days ago, which is completely unverifiable in the first place, then you can't verify, even if you try to verify.

So if you've already used your days for the rolling time period and you get something that you don't think can be verified, you better just drag yourself into work and tough it out because we're really trying to save money here.

Right or wrong, we all knew they were coming after sick useage. But this particular concession is deep and dangerous and is a flat out safety issue.

Are there abusers out there? I don't know, but supposedly the "big data" white paper crowd thinks so. OK, fine, perhaps there are some abusers. This is a drastic over reach that 100% will result in ether pilots now flying sick for "grey area" illnesses they don't feel can be easily verified, or pilots ending up having to fight for their jobs because they couldn't verify something that isn't verifiable in the first place. Or both. Almost definately both.

And no "records check" is going to change that in the slightest.

This new policy will reduce sick usage, and will increase pilots flying sick while at the same time increasing disciplinary action against pilots, potential abusers and non abusers alike.

The rolling lookback and loss of ability to pre-verify were deep, radically over reaching concessions. Outside of bankruptcy. In the best negotiating climate in the history of the industry.

I get that we're suppose to value out the entire agreement and weigh everything and all that. But a poison pill is a poison pill. Some things are just not for sale. At any price.

Bump!

Carl

+1...my first +1 ever!

question for anyone who knows:
how does delta mgmt even get reliable data on sick leave usage rates at other airlines?

If they believe our rates have risen too much, I can understand how they are seeing that, but to claim to have UAL or AA sick data? If they do in fact have that info, that would indicate that our management is much cozier with competing management than I would have ever imagined....wonder what else they are all scheming up?