Delta TA
- Thread starter derg
- Start date
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
In other words, same old, same old.
Cptnchia
Dissatisfied Customer
So, here's where I'm at.
>Pay
No issues there. Didn't expect restoration, didn't get it. I can live with the proposed rates. IRS gonna take most of it anyway.
>PS
Again, no issues. I understand what they are wanting to do with it. I would rather the monetization of it happened outside of Sec 6, but overall not worth the fight.
>JV
Waiting to see full language. I've heard it explained two different ways. One good, one bad.
>RJs
Overall a net reduction in block and seats to favor mainline. Passable.
>Sick Leave
Waiting on full language. Again, so much noise on this one, I gotta read it for myself.
>LCA trips holdout
Totally unacceptable. It's a no vote for me, and it doesn't even affect me. I never bid to fly with LCAs as an FO, and as a captain, not my problem. But still, it's the principle.
So overall, it looks like I'm a one issue voter. And that is NO.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
I could see how the sick leave and LCA provision can make folks vote no. The sick leave verification would be difficult for me to stomach if our negotiators came back with similar language. Remember laws were recently made because someone flew sick and was in a fatal accident. Then throw in some possible weakened international scope language, it's even easier to see.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
I can see it, too, as long as the decision is made using a rational analysis of the pros and cons. But that would first require someone attending a road show and listening to what the negotiators and officers have to say. You can't analyze something without all of the information. I stopped by APC (yes, I feel dirty) after reading Marcus's post, and he's right. Just the usual bunch of angry whiners screaming and hollering with fake numbers that they've pulled out of their posterier. It appears that @PeanuckleCRJ and @Cptnchia are making a much more reasoned approach to it, and have actually spoken to the negotiators, so if they've made the decision to vote no, then I can understand that. But the guys posting on APC and FB seem to be just the typical "vote no all the time" dooshes.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Wait wait wait, you mean it's NOT normal for your employer to start talking about discipline when you've called in sick more than 2 times in a rolling 12 month period, with or without a doctors note?
Because every new guy on your seniority list who came from a regional has been subject to those kinds of provisions for the past 10 years.
For all we know, in comparison, they think the new agreement is great because they've been beaten up so much over the last 10 years.
And don't forget, we created these guys. It's our fault. We allowed our employers to contract with companies with substandard working conditions, and then we said that if you want to move up you have to work there, and then when the career stagnated we told them to be happy to have a job, and then when hiring started moving at a trickle we told them "See!? Everything will be fine!"
All the while, they kept getting beat up. NOW they're at mainline, and they can vote, and they may think that since this is so much better than what they dealt with in the past that it's a-ok.
We did this, not management.
Because every new guy on your seniority list who came from a regional has been subject to those kinds of provisions for the past 10 years.
For all we know, in comparison, they think the new agreement is great because they've been beaten up so much over the last 10 years.
And don't forget, we created these guys. It's our fault. We allowed our employers to contract with companies with substandard working conditions, and then we said that if you want to move up you have to work there, and then when the career stagnated we told them to be happy to have a job, and then when hiring started moving at a trickle we told them "See!? Everything will be fine!"
All the while, they kept getting beat up. NOW they're at mainline, and they can vote, and they may think that since this is so much better than what they dealt with in the past that it's a-ok.
We did this, not management.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
I think certain individuals (ok just one) who got the express ride to #tier1 always forget that today's "historic hiring" is a single event to cataclysmic stagnation.
Those of us old farts (even #tier2 for lifers like me) that have seen several cycles have the cynicism for a reason.
While past performance doesn't indicate future results, it's myopic to ignore historical patterns in a cyclical industry. Just ask the 22 year-old hired at US Air in 1989.
Those of us old farts (even #tier2 for lifers like me) that have seen several cycles have the cynicism for a reason.
While past performance doesn't indicate future results, it's myopic to ignore historical patterns in a cyclical industry. Just ask the 22 year-old hired at US Air in 1989.
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
I'm not sure I follow, but I disagree for now. I never blamed the mainline partner for struggles at RAH
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
That PBGC money is good stuff, no?
little_cricket
Well-Known Member
More irresponsible is a yes vote just to vote yes. A yes vote must be earned.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
More? I wouldn't say it's more or less irresponsible. Any vote that is cast for irrational reasons is irresponsible. Become informed by listening to the negotiators, officers, and anyone else available to discuss how and why the agreement was reached, think it through rationally, then cast a vote. Anything else is irresponsible.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
DTW based to do what used to be DC9-10/30 flying in the midwest, for the E190, IMO. Move the 717's out of DTW to the west coast
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
You get votes by targeting groups of people who will vote for whatever it is you're offering them.
With this, it's focused toward guys that are interested on recapturing small RJ scope, and guys who want money. The guys on the top want the money, so they'll vote for it. The guys on the bottom want to capture small RJ scope, because they saw it ruin their careers.
Additionally, the guys at the bottom have been beaten up elsewhere, so if you offer a change in the work rules that is still a massive improvement to what they dealt with at their last regional, they'll jump at it.
It's Stockholm Syndrome.
H46Bubba
Well-Known Member
Primarily for work issues.
Rocketman99
Frozen Guppy Manipulator
And also that's it's as uncomfortable as sitting in a CRJ for extended periods.
ian
Well-Known Member
from the other site:
June 11, 2015
(pdf is attached as a viewing option)
Contract 2015 Chairman’s Update #1
Fellow pilots of Council 66,
The MEC voted on the TA in open session yesterday in Atlanta. As you may know by now, the result of the TA vote was 11 for and 8 against. Both NYC reps voted against the TA. It will now proceed to membership ratification, where you will be the final arbiters. More on that soon.
Below is a transcript of the speech that I made to the MEC yesterday during open session. This will provide you a brief look at my reasoning for voting “No.” I recognize that there is a thirst for information, and we will follow up very shortly with more background for you. In addition to information from your reps, you can count on the Delta MEC administration to provide you with a wealth of information at https://dal.alpa.org. As always, feel free to reach out to me, Chris, or Dave, with your thoughts and concerns.
“Ladies and gentlemen, members of the MEC, and MEC administration,
“I would like to thank the negotiators, the MEC administration, the attorneys, subject-matter experts, and everyone involved in the effort put forth thus far in crafting the TA before us.
“Never in the last 42 years that I have been piloting commercial aircraft have I witnessed a greater spread between the economic climate in which we found ourselves and the resulting agreement. And, that most certainly includes our pre- and post-bankruptcy concessionary contracts.
“We are highly skilled, mission-oriented pilots. We are, in my estimation and the company’s as well, the finest pilots on the planet. Our hard work should be rewarding us, not demanding that we be granting the company relief. We have before us the best negotiating environment in our careers; multiple record-breaking profits; incredibly high load factors. The timing is right for an historic contract. We raised expectations, sure, in our opener and in our communications—are we guilty of over-promising and under-delivering? I’ll leave that up to you to decide.
“The pilots of Delta Air Lines have spoken loudly to us—in crew lounges, at meetings, in multiple surveys and out flying the line. These pilots have given greatly to save this airline, and they have told us loud and clear that now is the time for payback.
“But perhaps we are missing the point.
“This agreement isn’t about money or scope or sick leave. This agreement is about respect. Respect from the company and self-respect for ourselves. Agreeing to this TA means we accept the notion that management has little respect for our past sacrifices and the professional job we do day in and day out. Agreeing to this TA means we have lost our own self-respect for our skills and dedication. We will chase a pay rate, and abandon benefits and quality of life, just to get to that shiny number. And frankly, the pay rate ain’t all that shiny.
“Look closely at this agreement. The devil is in the details.
“With great thanks for all those involved in its crafting, my belief is that accepting a TA that is marginal at best will haunt us for years to come. It’s time we stopped bluffing. Management has overreached, and we must not validate their overreach. In good faith to both the pilots I represent and all the pilots of Delta Air Lines, I must vote ‘No’ on this TA.
“I vowed to follow a clear process from the start. In keeping with that promise, I can’t accept a TA that clearly does not meet the mandate of this pilot group. The pilots’ mandate and the direction given to the negotiators never included making drastic sacrifices to important sections of our contract during such prosperous times.
“For those around the horseshoe who want to reject it but plan to pass it along to the pilots to ‘let them decide,’ I ask, ‘What purpose do you serve? Why have an MEC?’
“This body’s credibility is at stake every time we forward a TA to our fellow pilots. We are the first arbiters after the negotiators and must not abdicate our solemn duty.
“This TA should sell itself, and common sense says it cannot. It under-delivers. It would take a full court press, with a very slim chance of getting this thing across the finish line. It shouldn’t be so. It must not be so.
“Thank you for the privilege of addressing you.”
Respectfully,
Chairman
Council 66
“Member Driven”
Air Line Pilots Association, International
[URL='http://www.alpa.org/']ALPA - Home[/URL]
June 11, 2015
(pdf is attached as a viewing option)
Contract 2015 Chairman’s Update #1
Fellow pilots of Council 66,
The MEC voted on the TA in open session yesterday in Atlanta. As you may know by now, the result of the TA vote was 11 for and 8 against. Both NYC reps voted against the TA. It will now proceed to membership ratification, where you will be the final arbiters. More on that soon.
Below is a transcript of the speech that I made to the MEC yesterday during open session. This will provide you a brief look at my reasoning for voting “No.” I recognize that there is a thirst for information, and we will follow up very shortly with more background for you. In addition to information from your reps, you can count on the Delta MEC administration to provide you with a wealth of information at https://dal.alpa.org. As always, feel free to reach out to me, Chris, or Dave, with your thoughts and concerns.
“Ladies and gentlemen, members of the MEC, and MEC administration,
“I would like to thank the negotiators, the MEC administration, the attorneys, subject-matter experts, and everyone involved in the effort put forth thus far in crafting the TA before us.
“Never in the last 42 years that I have been piloting commercial aircraft have I witnessed a greater spread between the economic climate in which we found ourselves and the resulting agreement. And, that most certainly includes our pre- and post-bankruptcy concessionary contracts.
“We are highly skilled, mission-oriented pilots. We are, in my estimation and the company’s as well, the finest pilots on the planet. Our hard work should be rewarding us, not demanding that we be granting the company relief. We have before us the best negotiating environment in our careers; multiple record-breaking profits; incredibly high load factors. The timing is right for an historic contract. We raised expectations, sure, in our opener and in our communications—are we guilty of over-promising and under-delivering? I’ll leave that up to you to decide.
“The pilots of Delta Air Lines have spoken loudly to us—in crew lounges, at meetings, in multiple surveys and out flying the line. These pilots have given greatly to save this airline, and they have told us loud and clear that now is the time for payback.
“But perhaps we are missing the point.
“This agreement isn’t about money or scope or sick leave. This agreement is about respect. Respect from the company and self-respect for ourselves. Agreeing to this TA means we accept the notion that management has little respect for our past sacrifices and the professional job we do day in and day out. Agreeing to this TA means we have lost our own self-respect for our skills and dedication. We will chase a pay rate, and abandon benefits and quality of life, just to get to that shiny number. And frankly, the pay rate ain’t all that shiny.
“Look closely at this agreement. The devil is in the details.
“With great thanks for all those involved in its crafting, my belief is that accepting a TA that is marginal at best will haunt us for years to come. It’s time we stopped bluffing. Management has overreached, and we must not validate their overreach. In good faith to both the pilots I represent and all the pilots of Delta Air Lines, I must vote ‘No’ on this TA.
“I vowed to follow a clear process from the start. In keeping with that promise, I can’t accept a TA that clearly does not meet the mandate of this pilot group. The pilots’ mandate and the direction given to the negotiators never included making drastic sacrifices to important sections of our contract during such prosperous times.
“For those around the horseshoe who want to reject it but plan to pass it along to the pilots to ‘let them decide,’ I ask, ‘What purpose do you serve? Why have an MEC?’
“This body’s credibility is at stake every time we forward a TA to our fellow pilots. We are the first arbiters after the negotiators and must not abdicate our solemn duty.
“This TA should sell itself, and common sense says it cannot. It under-delivers. It would take a full court press, with a very slim chance of getting this thing across the finish line. It shouldn’t be so. It must not be so.
“Thank you for the privilege of addressing you.”
Respectfully,
Chairman
Council 66
“Member Driven”
Air Line Pilots Association, International
[URL='http://www.alpa.org/']ALPA - Home[/URL]
Koenigsberger_Katjase
Well-Known Member
That whole email reads almost exactly the same as some of the LH emails. Very interesting to read.
H46Bubba
Well-Known Member
Yeah that too! I do it quite regularly for 5+ hours each way!