NWA/DAL Pilots reach agrement on SLI...

[Superpilot92]

Without being offensive, I think Superpilot92 is a little naive.

NWA/DAL is going to be a blood bath. DAL is asking for things it doesn't intend to share with NWA.

NWA senior pilots want to staple the bottom 3000 DAL guys in order to preserve NWA seniority progression as a result of expected retirements that have now been pushed back another five years.

ALPA fought for AGE 65 so and it should all be remembered that the reason the SLI will be so painful is because ALPA wanted age 65.

Age 65 is now a reality and guess what? SLI has the senior fighting against the junior. Great move ALPA.

DAL/NWA is going to be bloody.

Feel free to share what you feel is "naive" in my comments?

 

[Superpilot92]

By the way.....job security and the legacy/majors don't go together either :bomb: :nuts: I expect to see some of y'all in my right seat soon......At about 20 bucks an hour.....

Not going to happen, but say what you need to justify your decision to stay at ASA. Good luck with that

 

[JAM-BRO]

BOWOW dude.... you are so DAMN RIGHT!!!! Every single word is 110% correct. Great post.... Someone who really gets what is happening...

First off, Joe Merchant.....quit waisting all of our time with your conjecture and opinion, you made your career choice by staying at ASA, keep your trap shut you have no dog in this fight. The rest of us, we have no control over what is happening, the merger will happen whether we want it to or not. Anyone hired after 2001.....don't stress out over what may or may not happen, we have ZERO input or control over what happens.

What we DO all need to do is realize that the other MEC is not our enemy and that managment is playing us like a fine tuned instrument, keep us divided and fighting each other and we won't be strong enough to fight them. What's this bullsh!t 19% "payraise" we all so excited about? Have we all started smoking crack? 19% is about 1/2 of what we gave up to keep this ponzie scheme running the last 6 years....am I the only person who see's this? I am disgusted that we have come to this....but in reality this is RIGHT where they want us.

I for one pledge right here right now.......NOT to play into the negitivity bull******************** against NWALPA vs DALPA....and grant management what they want...a divided pilot group.

 

[Superpilot92]

First off, Joe Merchant.....quit waisting all of our time with your conjecture and opinion, you made your career choice by staying at ASA, keep your trap shut you have no dog in this fight. The rest of us, we have no control over what is happening, the merger will happen whether we want it to or not. Anyone hired after 2001.....don't stress out over what may or may not happen, we have ZERO input or control over what happens.

What we DO all need to do is realize that the other MEC is not our enemy and that management is playing us like a fine tuned instrument, keep us divided and fighting each other and we won't be strong enough to fight them. What's this bullsh!t 19% "payraise" we all so excited about? Have we all started smoking crack? 19% is about 1/2 of what we gave up to keep this ponzie scheme running the last 6 years....am I the only person who see's this? I am disgusted that we have come to this....but in reality this is RIGHT where they want us.

I for one pledge right here right now.......NOT to play into the negativity bull******************** against NWALPA vs DALPA....and grant management what they want...a divided pilot group.

Thats exactly what i have been saying! Completely agree:beer:

 

[Tref]

Is that in Section 1B of your contract? I believe that section deals with the Joint Venture, Feeder Affiliates and when NWA is the "acquiring" airline.

Doesn't Section 1C of your contract deal with Successorship? I didn't see such a restriction in your successorship language. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that I haven't seen it. Contract language can be hard to understand, so it's quite possible that you have that protection and I just haven't found it. Perhaps you could show us where it is? Here's what I've seen. Forgive the font.

Dude, not too cool posting part of someone else's contract on a public message board.

 

[igneousy2]

Just checked with the negotiating committee. They KNOW which section DAL thinks they have snaked.

But the answer is still "no way". Why? Because both ALPA's and the company's negotiator notes show otherwise.

"Notes?" you say. Yup, each side makes detailed notes during contract negotiations in order to clairify any downline disputes. "But they're only notes!". True, but NWA and ALPA have a long history (precendent setting), that notes are admissible as evidence in arbitration. In each case, the side with the notes on point wins.

So, go ahead and sign off on what you think you might have. Make sure to get a "out" clause that states if something doesn't hold up, you guys keep your cash.

Nu

Whoever you spoke to on the negotiating committee is drinking some pretty strong Kool Aid.

Sure...notes are admissable as evidence...but the arbitrator is free to weigh ALL of the evidence and decide the case.

Other things that can be used as evidence...

past-practice (yours and theirs), industry practice, common usage.

Additionally, things like past-practice, negotiator notes, etc. are generally only used to clarify contract language if the arbitrator feels that the contract language is unclear...if the arbitrator feels that the contract language is clear than all of these other things mean nothing.

The hard thing with notes is that in order for a provision of the contract to be binding...it must be clear that BOTH parties intended the meaning that you are trying to represent in your notes...and usually, your notes represent your thoughts and ideas and how you interpreted what the company said...not necessarily what they meant or were themselves thinking. For notes to be solid evidence, some other supporting evidence is usually required. It is not impossible, and it may be a very strong argument - but it is far from the slam-dunk that your contact on the committee is trying to make it out to be.

Nothing is ever guranteed in an arbitration...it is ALWAYS better to come to a mutually agreed upon solution than to roll the dice in binding arbitration.

 

[Fly4hire]

Sure...notes are admissible as evidence...but the arbitrator is free to weigh ALL of the evidence and decide the case.

You are assuming arbitration.

From the little we know it's leaning towards DALPA exchanged pay for relaxing their section 1 to allow a split operation.

Nu is saying our section 1 does not allow that. There will be a legal challenge that DAL/DALPA (NWA management?) will say it is allowed and NWALPA will say it does not. It will likely end up in court, and possibly arbitration.

The truly sad thing in this is DALPA will have sided with DAL and (possibly NWA) management against another ALPA unit to get their way via an act of betrayal that they could not achieve at the negotiating table.

The rationalizations are all already well articulated here and elsewhere. I won't flame and call it Scab like - it does not rise to that level. It is definitely "conduct unbecoming" at the very least.

I hope that bed you made with management is cozy, because that's the only "friend" you have left.
Anti-union actions like these will be very hard, to recover from in the future. Like the groom that sleeps with another woman on the eve of his wedding, you are forever untrustworthy.

There will be a time in the future where you will need the solidarity of the entire combined pilot group to work together against a common foe. A very, very bad way to start.

 

[JohnQ]

Seniority directly correlates to pay and work rules (schedule).....indirectly it relates to retirement if you have one....For those of us saving for our own retirement it directly affects it through pay.....

I never said I would work for free....If the pay doesn't meet my needs....I will quit....

If seniority wasn't so important...we wouldn't be having these food fights at DAL/NWA, AAA/AWA, NWA/Republic, AA/TWA....etc.....

You say seniority isn't that important....but the facts don't support your premise....

You are partially correct in that these fights do come down to seniority...or the perception that it is "everything." It is not, but unfortunately, pilots may not realize it for years. We at DAL are actually trying to rewrite this tired record, but I am not sure that NWA wants anything different than the old dysfunctional model.

Why do I say that seniority isn't "everything?" Because I would rather be junior at SWA than senior at Frontier. When DAL and Western merged in 1987 there was no arbitration and all that mess. Still, for awhile you had former WAL guys griping about how they got screwed, even though in the next breath they would be pleasantly amazed by the size of their newly-printed DAL paycheck.

Every one of those guys who supposedly lost their sacred seniority could be a widebody international captain by now, if they haven't already retired. Seniority is important, but the perception that you have to give up everything at all costs to protect what you think you have is a losing perspective.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Seniority is important, but the perception that you have to give up everything at all costs to protect what you think you have is a losing perspective.

and again!

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Seniority is important, but the perception that you have to give up everything at all costs to protect what you think you have is a losing perspective.

and again!

 

[~~~^~~~]

From the little we know it's leaning towards DALPA exchanged pay for relaxing their section 1 to allow a split operation.

Nu is saying our section 1 does not allow that. There will be a legal challenge that DAL/DALPA (NWA management?) will say it is allowed and NWALPA will say it does not. It will likely end up in court, and possibly arbitration.

The truly sad thing in this is DALPA will have sided with DAL and (possibly NWA) management against another ALPA unit to get their way via an act of betrayal that they could not achieve at the negotiating table.

We do not know for sure that is the direction that Delta is going. All we have are some news articles which fell short on hard facts.

I do not believe Delta's pilots or management want separate operations. As has been suggested this is probably an interim arrangement to try to maintain the benefits of being a "first mover" and remain ahead of our competition. (could it be that the press got the anti trust immunity issue confused?)

IMHO at the first meeting the DAL pilots sent a French wine and cheese basket and the NWA pilots sent a boarding party with pistols drawn. The NWA had no plan but to battle for the ship. Pulling up the boarding plank is a natural reaction. But this reaction is not a long term course of action. We all benefit from a rational resolution. Getting there will go faster if everyone puts their daggers away.

Litigation is a losing position. If you read the history of such cases, the outcome is nearly always the same. By the time the matter reaches trial the Corporation has moved on. Despite unions' best efforts to prevent job losses through successorship language and scope the desire of the Corporation has prevailed and the rights of the replacement workers are used to justify the Corporation's actions.

Again and again I preach that ALPA's complex and convoluted scope language renders it legally ineffective at binding employers. Both Delta and NWA pilots have contracts with too many holes in them.

My only point is that we can achieve more by working together.

The Delta MEC has been very smart at each stage to maximize leverage by working with other forces.

 

[Fly4hire]

We do not know for sure that is the direction that Delta is going. All we have are some news articles which fell short on hard facts.

This is true of everything we have heard in the press, yet DALPA is guilty of attempting to negotiate in the press. If we say it, it's untrue, yet your spin is accurate? The "boarding party", favoring arbitration' 3000 junior DAL stapled on our part is nonsense as much as saying we were given a completely fair and balanced offer.

The truth is somewhere in the middle, and I would argue we are in Mexican Standoff where DALPA thinks they might get the drop. Not exactly a sound strategy either.

As has been suggested this is probably an interim arrangement to try to maintain the benefits of being a "first mover" and remain ahead of our competition.

Except after a merge "us" is "you", and we are not the competition - the other guy is. Making your partners in crime the competition usually ends messily.

IMHO at the first meeting the DAL pilots sent a French wine and cheese basket and the NWA pilots sent a boarding party with pistols drawn.

Yeah, but I heard the wine was laced with arsenic, and the basket was a Trojan Horse. Also the unprepared stuff of the first meeting was because NWA management was negotiating with DAL management, DALPA was privy, and NWALPA was kept in the dark by our own management. DALPA could of given us the heads up as well, but chose to exploit it instead. Sort of like showing up for a scheduled scrimmage and finding out it's the bowl game. Our managers play really dirty. It would be wise to recall where RA came from. That was 1st down DALPA in the 1st qtr. History at this point.

Getting there will go faster if everyone puts their daggers away.

Concur!! That also means stopping the "who has a bigger dagger and who slipped it out of the hilt first" stuff. Bottom line is we can both make each other bleed fatally regardless of who draws first blood.

My only point is that we can achieve more by working together.

That also means you have to chose sides - if you chose to partner with your management against us good luck convincing us you have any of our interests in mind. Personally I think DALPA is being played like a fiddle by RA. Waaaaay too trusting.

The Delta MEC has been very smart at each stage to maximize leverage by working with other forces.

Leverage against whom, for whose benefit?

At the end of the day, we will need to stand shoulder to shoulder against much larger forces than our SLI squabbles.

That does not mean we simply acquiesce to DALPA terms in order to accomplish that.

 

[dtfl]

This is true of everything we have heard in the press, yet DALPA is guilty of attempting to negotiate in the press.

Really?? Thats interesting considering DALPA has HARDLY released ANYTHING during these negotiations! Even DALPA members are irritated at that.