Delta TA

MikeD said:
This sounds like something that "the Man" would be pleased with. AKA management?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

"The Man" is very sensitive to Wall Street and the profitability of the perception of labor peace.

He's also a businessman. If he could get labor to bite off on a cheap contract, so be it, it's all about "cost of goods sold".
 
Seggy said:
@ATN_Pilot did you see this yet?

https://video-lga1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/h...=850fb640f0da7f81ced501a118a0d414&oe=55836B52

You know as well as I do that they are a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG way away from a PEB. Yes, it is a small clip and it could have been edited, but a PEB shouldn't even be in Mike's vocabulary right now.
Click to expand...

Aye yi yi, they're already making memes too.:eek2:

Malone wrote a pretty good open letter to Donatelli about throwing the "PEB" around so early.
 
Seggy said:
You know as well as I do that the Delta MEC has a lot of 'spinsters' who will do what they need to advance their agenda. So to say something is 'demonstrably false' when it deals with the spin the machine is putting on it, I will get views from a variety of positions. Read the Council 1 update. The MEC is wanting the message to be closely guarded.

Post a link to the language, I will read it, but be careful on being played by the Machine here.
Click to expand...

Looking at this from an unbiased view with no affiliations to the company or union(Many at Delta believe they are the same:D) I see alittle spin but much more facts from the MEC. They have brought out independent studies, charts, and a multitude of statistics. The opposing views have brought emotion, tons of rhetoric, and very little facts. Challenge them on a fact and you're quickly accused of being an ALPA apologist or asked if you're on FPL. My own friends asked me if I helped set up chairs at the Roadshow yesterday:bounce::bounce::bounce:
 
Trip7 said:
That's silly. @Derg calls him Puppy, almost everyone at the roadshow called him that, and I'm lazy at typing. You're just going to have to be irritated.
Click to expand...

An old squadron mate or fellow vet using a callsign is one thing, we're wierd like that, (even though I refuse to participate,) but when someone with no military background tries to emulate it, it's just embarrassing.

Except for Taco. Errbody calls him Taco!
 
Cptnchia said:
An old squadron mate or fellow vet using a callsign is one thing, we're wierd like that, (even though I refuse to participate,) but when someone with no military background tries to emulate it, it's just embarrassing.

Except for Taco. Errbody calls him Taco!
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion. Agree to disagree
 
Seggy said:
@Trip7 you have no clue about my experience with the 'Delta Machine', you really don't.

I see that they are out in full force here.
Click to expand...

You have a lot of experience. I'll take that into consideration and verify with @ATN_Pilot

Seggy said:
You know as well as I do that the Delta MEC has a lot of 'spinsters' who will do what they need to advance their agenda. So to say something is 'demonstrably false' when it deals with the spin the machine is putting on it, I will get views from a variety of positions. Read the Council 1 update. The MEC is wanting the message to be closely guarded.

Post a link to the language, I will read it, but be careful on being played by the Machine here.
Click to expand...

Here ya go:

G. Medical Release Requirement

A 1. The DHS or his designee may request further information from a pilot who is required to verifyregarding his sickness or may require a pilot to provide a medical release when:
a. a pilot’s sick leave exceeds a medical release threshold, or
b. verification is required, or has been sought under Section 14 F. 4. may be required to provide 2.,and the Company withDHS is not able to assess the medical basis for the use of sick leave.
Note: Prior to requiring a medical release, the pilot must first be provided with an additional opportunity to submit verification that is acceptable to the DHS.
2. A medical release will be limited to a written authorization for release of medical information (release), provided the release is limited toto the DHS for:
1a. the specific sickness for which the pilot claimed sick leave, and
2b. the day(s) on which the pilot claimed sick leave and the consecutive day(s) off immediately preceding and succeeding the day(s) on which a pilot claimed sick leave, and.
3. If, following the review of information provided pursuant to a medical release, the DHS is not able to satisfactorily assess the medical basis for the use of sick leave, the release may be expanded to include a Company designated doctor or other health care professional(s) and the Director – Health Services and the Senior Vice- President of Flight Operations.
Click to expand...
 
Trip7 said:
You have a lot of experience. I'll take that into consideration and verify with @ATN_Pilot
Click to expand...

I think he's letting some of his personal experiences cloud his judgment about this particular issue. I've certainly had my issues with DALPA, but that's irrelevant. All that matters is what the TA actually says. And the language just doesn't support the garbage being spread online.
 
Seggy said:
@ATN_Pilot did you see this yet?

https://video-lga1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/h...=850fb640f0da7f81ced501a118a0d414&oe=55836B52

You know as well as I do that they are a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG way away from a PEB. Yes, it is a small clip and it could have been edited, but a PEB shouldn't even be in Mike's vocabulary right now.
Click to expand...

I hadn't seen it, but I see nothing improper about it. Discussing the process is important, and the current RLA environment is the most important consideration. These idiots on APC thinking they can push management around and get somewhere need someone like Puppy to slap them around and realize how things work in the real world. Delta isn't getting released. Ever again. Moak's views on modern day legacy bargaining are dead on balls accurate. It's all about incremental improvements in short duration agreements done by the amendable date. Trying to push management around and thinking the NMB is going to play ball is unrealistic, childish nonsense.
 
So it looks what I said was right. If this outside company can't verify the reason I called in sick, it gets moved up the food chain to VP of Flight Ops. Didn't know he was a doctor as well!
 
@ATN_Pilot what Mike said was rhetoric. They are what, six years away from a PEB? Considering they didn't even pass the amendable date the NMB process isn't really relevant at this point.

I agree some folks on APC need to chill out, as well as the naysayers throw factually incorrect bombs out there, but the Delta Machine isn't helping themselves out here. Honestly, as an outsider, I see both sides spewing rhetoric.
 
Seggy said:
@ATN_Pilot Considering they didn't even pass the amendable date the NMB process isn't really relevant at this point.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I thought when I saw the video the MEC chair said it's all about time line, you don't want to be involved with the NMB. I'm not sure of their language when it comes to negotiating for a contract, but wouldn't putting out a TA early and having it rejected actually put them closer to getting the NMB involved vs just continuing to work until around the amendable date?
 
Seggy said:
@ATN_Pilot what Mike said was rhetoric. They are what, six years away from a PEB? Considering they didn't even pass the amendable date the NMB process isn't really relevant at this point.
Click to expand...

No, that's rhetoric. You know damned well that the Council recommended years ago, and it was put into Admin Manual policy, that ALPA start preparing the MEC and NC a good 6-12 months prior to the openers, let alone the amendable date. And having taken part in the "go team" briefings that are done under that policy, I can tell you that a big part of it is imparting upon the MEC the importance of informing the membership of the RLA process long before bargaining even starts. If you're not talking about how a PEB works until years into the process, then you've already lost your pilot group.

The APC loons need to be countered. And part of countering their rhetoric is letting people know how the process actually works if you reject the TA and opt instead for the traditional process. With an NMB that will no longer consider releasing a legacy carrier, that means PEB. Not informing people of that would be irresponsible.

I agree some folks on APC need to chill out, as well as the naysayers throw factually incorrect bombs out there, but the Delta Machine isn't helping themselves out here.
Click to expand...

You've been flying with too many conspiracy theorists lately. Pretty soon you're going to start spouting right wing talking points, too!
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I hadn't seen it, but I see nothing improper about it. Discussing the process is important, and the current RLA environment is the most important consideration. These idiots on APC thinking they can push management around and get somewhere need someone like Puppy to slap them around and realize how things work in the real world. Delta isn't getting released. Ever again. Moak's views on modern day legacy bargaining are dead on balls accurate. It's all about incremental improvements in short duration agreements done by the amendable date. Trying to push management around and thinking the NMB is going to play ball is unrealistic, childish nonsense.
Click to expand...

+1,000,000,000

*Slow Claps*

*Standing Ovation*

*Wipes Tear*
 
Screaming_Emu said:
Yeah, that's what I thought when I saw the video the MEC chair said it's all about time line, you don't want to be involved with the NMB. I'm not sure of their language when it comes to negotiating for a contract, but wouldn't putting out a TA early and having it rejected actually put them closer to getting the NMB involved vs just continuing to work until around the amendable date?
Click to expand...

No, after a TA is rejected, there are two options. You can either start back at square one, or you can clean up a few items. If Anderson considered this his LBF (and he probably did), then he's probably inclined to go back to the traditional process and exchange a new opener. That way he can drag it out for a few years and get the cost savings on it. There's little incentive for him to cave if this deal fails. That just encourages bad behavior (from his perspective, anyway).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top