Delta TA

PeanuckleCRJ said:
It was a landslide sure enough... just completely the other direction. Quoted for posterity:
Click to expand...

bradd-pitt-dance.gif
 
DE727UPS said:
It should all pay the same. Just like UPS. Saves the company money in training costs.
Click to expand...
Ive always wondered how people at UPS decide what aircraft they want to bid for. I guessing certain fleets do certain types of trips? The 747 makes sense because it goes international but what makes someone bid the bus instead of say the 75/76?

Maybe PM instead of too much thread drift?
 
And that's why we don't want that level of banding in a place like DL (and UPS, really).... with that many fleets, banding and freezes cost quite a few pilot jobs.
 
ClarkGriswold said:
Ive always wondered how people at UPS decide what aircraft they want to bid for. I guessing certain fleets do certain types of trips? The 747 makes sense because it goes international but what makes someone bid the bus instead of say the 75/76?

Maybe PM instead of too much thread drift?
Click to expand...

People bid what makes sense for them. The beauty of it is it all pays the same so no need to chase bigger planes to make more. If you live in Buffalo and want to see home every day, you bid da Bus. If you don't want to deal with international, you bid domestic 757 or da Bus. (Mexico and Canada, however, are domestic in the UPS world). Again, people bid what makes sense for them. It's nice to not have to chase airframes. UPS is the king of doing things cheap. Ask any Amflight guy. One pay scale is one of the few win-win's they got at UPS. I'm sure they think they invented the concept....
 
Oh, Buzz...

Thanks for the lecture but the good people of CVG should send you back to the line well in advance of any subsequent TA vote.

"The taco truck gave us a poop sandwich with undigested corn and reeks of hops . We know you wanted a carne asada quesadilla and a hot hats but it's a sandwich and you won't go hungry in the meantime"

Fellow 108 Pilots,



The voting window for the Contact 2015 tentative agreement closed this afternoon. The agreement was rejected by the Delta pilots by a vote of 35% in favor to 65% against. Results by council are not yet available.



What happens now?

We remain in Section 6 negotiations, and we will eventually get a different agreement. For the new agreement to be better than the agreement that was just rejected, it will presumably have to be a superior agreement and make up for the lost gains associated with the delay that will now ensue—including the $114 million in pay raises we were set to begin receiving 10 days ago. It is speculation to predict when a subsequent deal will occur and if it will be of sufficient value to warrant your support, but we are committed to doing whatever we can to achieve that agreement.



John and I have done our best not to speculate on what the future holds under a rejection scenario, but despite how some reps downplayed or dismissed the possibility during the ratification process, mediation may very well be in our future. The PWA states that “In the absence of an agreement by March 31, 2016, the parties agree to jointly petition the National Mediation Board for mediation services,” and many of us are also aware of Delta CEO Richard Anderson’s recent comment that “failure to ratify the agreement will lead to a very different and longer path that will not result in a better deal.”



We agree with MEC chairman Captain Mike Donatelli who recently wrote, “I do not fear mediation with the National Mediation Board (NMB); I’ve been there before. But I would be wrong to tell you that anything happens quickly in mediation where we lose control to a process designed to be deliberate, and slow.”



When John and I ran for our respective offices, we made a commitment to you. We told you that we would not pander and that we would tell you what you needed to hear, even if it was something you didn’t want to hear. We don’t fear mediation either, but neither do we relish the prospect. John and I hope to reach a timely agreement because we need to consider the potential arguments of both parties, should we enter mediation. Echoing what some reps have shared, in mediation, we might argue:

•The company is making record profits. They can afford to pay us what we want.
•We took Draconian pay cuts due to bankruptcy.
•We had our pensions terminated (or frozen).
•We are different and (somehow) better than our peers at other airlines.
•Our careers stagnated because of the change in mandatory retirement age.
•This is not about money. It’s about respect.
•We got “hurt” (or verb of your choosing) in the merger.
•We had pilots who were furloughed.
•We haven’t kept up with inflation.



Regardless of whether you agree with any, all, or none of these arguments, they all have one thing in common. Each can be preceded by the phrase “We deserve it because . . .”



When Linda Puchala, former chairman and current member of the NMB, was invited to speak to the Delta MEC as we prepared for negotiations, she explained that according to the NMB’s charter, “NMB programs provide an integrated labor-management dispute resolution process that effectively meets the agency’s statutory mandate to minimize work stoppages in the railroad and airline industries.” (Emphasis added). Put into laymen’s terms, she explained, “We don’t care what you think you deserve.”



Management would likely have a much simpler argument before the NMB. Their argument might be: “Distinguished members of the Board, we love our pilots. They are the best. In fact, last summer, six months before the amendable date, we reached an agreement that would have provided them with the highest pay rates in the history of aviation in this country, an industry-leading profit-sharing plan, and work rules that in aggregate were at or near the best in the industry. And they turned us down.”



It would be the NMB’s determination as to who was in the Board’s self-defined “zone of reasonableness.” We’ll leave it to you to determine the direction they would lean.



John and I made it clear that for a variety of reasons, we supported the rejected agreement, but the ultimate decision rested with the Delta pilots, and we respect the will of the pilot group. During the endgame of negotiations, we repeatedly asked our colleagues who opposed the agreement to provide us with a Plan B that would lead to a superior agreement. Repeatedly, we were met with silence, other than an eyebrow-raising suggestion that the Negotiating Committee go on vacation for a couple of weeks. We stand ready to work with our colleagues with a goal of reaching a better agreement in a timely manner, no matter how elusive that agreement may be. We are concerned, however, that the next move of some will not be toward a path of resolution, but instead toward a path of further division, which will include demands for resignation or recall attempts. That’s not the answer; it’s an excuse and would simply be an attempt to divert attention from the MEC’s own failures. We wholeheartedly support the MEC administration and each and every member of the Negotiating Committee.



Yet unwritten history will be the final arbiter of our collective decisions.



Respectfully,

Buzz and John
Click to expand...
 
Wow! I have never seen an MEC, or LEC in this case, fight so hard for a substandard agreement. It truly seems like they are scared. If RA wants to go all NWA on the pilot group because they wouldn't accept the shotty deal, then let's do this. He runs the top tier airline in the US...if he wants to start going old school anti-labor tricks then he will quickly fall from that perch. There is a reason DAL is on top, and there is a reason they are mopping the floor with everyone. If you get a pissed off pilot group, one big chunk of that success will go away. They better be smarter than that.
 
Like I said, I'm staunchly pro-union and my veins flow strong with SouthernJets blood, but this TA, well... All parties involved should have known better.

That's why the last month hurt, was hyper personal to me and I went a little "aggro" when the topic came up and scaled back my participiation on the topic, somewhat.
 
On a slightly related note:

It is impressive to see such a thoroughly expressed communication from a pair of LEC representatives. I know that that single message isn't the commulative total of communication processes in use within DALPA, but they should be commended for at least providing their humble opinion. I can respect elected officer(s) who are willing to stick their neck out there and take the heat when they speak what they believe far more than I can respect elected officer(s) who hide in the darkness never speaking a word publicly to those who got them into their positions.

A lot can be learned from DALPA's communication philosophy by smaller MECs and LECs. However, this also requires individuals to be willing to be "out there."

Good luck guys - a lot of us are counting on you gents to protect our careers, even if we are not quite there yet.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top