I do not have permission to do so, but I have read the ones that I got, as well as the ones that others got. I know from these e-mails that the MEC was not in most of this.

Super can you post yours?
How about 80 ktsCLP?

If it is the case that the Delta scope language was weak, then why bother writing into the contract if it's so easy for mgmt to pierce it? How long has ALPA been negotiating contracts? I'm fed up with the worthless, equivocating, vague contract language: "will make every effort", "to the maximum extent possible", blah blah blah. Then there's always mgmt's escape route called Force Majeure. Ask the Midwest guys if clear, concise, forceful, unambiguous contract language especially in the realm of scope are critical to self-preservation. Not to mention the importance of avoiding the whim of a potentially squishy, split-'er-down-the-middle (or worse) arbitrator who looks up and thinks the sky is purple. When are we gonna get it through our thick, bloated skulls that we need proven, professional, hard-ball negotiators across the table from mgmt, NOT pilots who went to some Tony Robbins insty-negotiator seminar that overnight empowers them to negotiate our future. The DAL MEC (and LECs?) is out of touch and apparently doesn't care. They must go. It's ok, I'm sure they already greased the skids for their next job at "National" or DAL Flight Ops Mgmt--two sides of the same coin these days.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my email also. I'm sure they are "snowed under" but I also wonder if, since they are lame ducks in MSP, that they are going to kick the can towards the end of the month.

Has anyone heard from an MSP rep on this?

Ferd

I agree 100%. We need professional negotiators that are not working for national. They need to be paid for by the MEC. The guys in DC have to many favors to repay.

From what I gather, the MSP and DTW guys are mum.

FWIW it looks like the newer e-mails that are going out have a bit of damage control in them. It appears that they are trying to stop the mess that was created by this!

I think that just upsets me more!

Yeah no kidding........nothing like a few hours and conference calls to get the story straight.

Interesting that the DTW reps are quiet........they're normally the firebreathers. Would be interesting to be an electronic fly on the wire inside their discussions.

Ferd

ACL65:

We know this began with the observations and concerns of the Code Share Committee. It is common in ALPA for the MEC Chair to bring a Grievance for the pilots. My semi informed guess is that this would have involved the Code Share Committee and Contract Negotiating Committee to resolve the meaning of the language in the PWA.

I don't know the people who serve in the capacities directly, but it is likely there is some overlap, so some Reps may have been in the loop and others not, depending on their involvement in committee work.

Usually D_ALPA controls their communications very well, so if there are different perspectives, that in itself is unusual.

Back to the Compass issue, if Compass had come aboard, would we be talking something like 186 large small jets allowed in addition to Compass's E175's? I agree Moak did this for a reason and that may have been part of the calculation. It is a question worth answering, wish they would address it.

IMHO this buys the Company a little time to get the network figured out before parking some mainline jets. As you pointed out, ALPA hopes attrition makes the problem painless.

One question I am going to trow out there is this. The union is stating that this side letter is adding job protection for 400 mainline pilots. My math shows about 200 new hires and NWA and 700+ at DAL. If that is the case it is 900. But if this only takes effect after SOC it is only 400.
So what is it? All of the 07 and 08 new hires or just the bottom ones after SOC. If it is the later, then this protection does not start until we have that one nagging stipulation from Bloch met, that they can furlough from each list independently prior to SOC.
Makes me wonder what the REAL language of this Grievance agreement is.

I agree Bar. That is why when I read a letter that states that Moak acted alone and the MEC was brought in to this very late in the game, (I assume after it was done) I wonder what is really up?

1) If he in fact did this along we have a major issue
2) Even if he did not, we have a major issue. No more messing with relaxation of section one, no matter how little it is perceived to be.

It is only 156 seats, but it is the fact that we had an agreement on this, and that 76 seat jet is a Clear and Present Danger to our jobs.

I understand all the fire breathing and anger over this, but at the same time why is there no push to make DELTA comply with the crew ratios. As I understand it right now over 12 hour flights on NW is 1 Capt and 3 FOs. Doesn't our new contract stipulate that 12 hr flights require the 2 Capt and 2 FOs. Seems to me this would create upward flow for NW immediately.