DAL junior Pilots sold down the river by NEW MEC

[Whine Lover]

" Reality is that,..." - ACL

We'll have none of that here.

Signed,

G. Lee

 

[ACL65PILOT]

No one voted. My understanding is that he filed the grievance, and settled it. I am sure if was not exactly that way, but it was put as such in the responses I and many others received from our LEC reps.
The MEC did not vote on this.

 

[JohnDoe]

I do find it a bit ridiculous, but a protection none the less for the junior pilots. I think Moak and company are walking a fine line, and will be smacked if they try more stuff like this without polling the pilots first. Bye Bye--General Lee

A bit ridiculous? Try alot. Walking a fine line? Try obliterated the line. Will be smacked down if they try more stuff like this? Please, if they haven't by now, they won't be. Everything I have seen and been told about moak is that this is nothing new. And you all continue to keep him in his position.

Protection for the junior pilots?? Puuuleazzze. Why don't you go out and ask every one of the 2000+ delta and nw pilots that were furloughed after 9-11 how the then-in-place no-furlough clause worked for them. But then, you were never furloughed from dal were you....so it comes as no suprise that you think so highly of a no-furlough clause. Won a judgement from Bloch you say.... So what? The people in question still had been furloughed and on the street.

 

[180ToTheMarker]

This added 156 total seats. As far as the union goes, they do need to watch it, no doubt.

Bye Bye--General Lee

Its not just the 156 seats GL. Its that this MEC is like a broken record with scope. Over and over again they lay down. Why? Where does it stop? Its the principle of the thing.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Those who have read this board for a long time know how many hours we've spent debating the issues. Now that Delta has outsourced more than 65% of its flying on a block hour, or departure, basis history has confirmed the fact that "exclusive" scope language is built on shifting sand. It lacks a solid foundation. People are surprised that I'm not PO'd at the recent turn of events. Well, I was angry years ago when we started in this direction and now, I know where we are going, how we are getting there and the smoke only confirms the damage has already been done.

When I wrote about how to re-write scope to make it "inclusive" some debated and many called names and a few outright threatened me. As history has again validated my concerns, it is my hope you will look at the facts objectively.

If Delta pilots wish to capture and control flying, they must do so by writing their contract language to INCLUDE flying rather than EXCLUDE it. This means simple phrases like "Delta pilots perform all Delta flying" or "all jets over 50,000 lbs takeoff weight are flown by Delta pilots." This means acting like a union and bringing pilots together, instead of searching for ways to use one pilot's work to supplement another pilot's income.

Let me give another example. For years property insurers have tried to exclude flood damage. When there is an earthquake that destroys a dam (as happened in California) the houses flood. Was that an earthquake or a flood? Everyone went to Court and the insurers lost BILLIONS. In Katrina, there was a hurricane that caused a break down in civil infrastructure and both the pumps that provide drainage and the levies failed. Clearly most of the property was damaged in a flood, yet the insurer’s who specifically excluded flood damage lost BILLIONS again, not to mention all the bad will that is created by contentious fights over the exclusive language. This is the same situation we have.

The fix was to write contract language that INCLUDED flood and limited it. The insurers that wrote, Flood is included up to a specific limit of $5,000, got out of Katrina with little losses, no litigation, and everyone was mostly happy with the same easy interpretation of the inclusive language.

ALPA’s contract language is written more to meet political compromises than it is to be enforceable. It is the result of the political process and the lawyers who know they must be sensitive to the political breezes of their Client’s desires.

To fix this situation we need to be much more objective and rational about how we view scope and our contracts. I don’t know how to make that change happen. A decertification effort would only weaken our representative structure. A recall effort is only as good as the new people who would rise to leadership.

The unfortunate truth is that a generation of pilots who struggled through bankruptcies have been misguided by the concept that outsourcing pays them dividends. They see the bargaining credits they received as objective proof of their logic. They don’t care that they are burning the crops in their wake and that those behind them will starve and fight over the remaining resources.

Fundamentally the people in charge must understand & believe:

1. The power of any union is its ability to bring the maximum number of pilots together to bargain collectively with one voice
2. Policies that exclude pilots - undermine your power and the effectiveness of your contract
3. Pilots do not buy airplanes... companies succeed when they deploy the most effective resources and services against their competition
4. Inclusive scope language is stronger than exclusive language
5. The goal must be “all Delta flying will be performed by Delta pilots.” Everything should be measured against this core tenet.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Well stated FIN!

But as you know, the current leadership does not see your way. Not does national.
Like I have advocated, third party negotiators that we pay should negotiate and write these contracts. Not people that has a glaring conflict of interest.

 

[FlyingSig]

Okay then:

- The New Delta has NO overlapping routes.

11 Routes - Wow!

- Delta is NOT shedding gates.

170 Gates WORLDWIDE. But I'm sure we need to have our operations in different terminals in places like BHM.

- The Delta MEC has given away nothing.

So are you saying they also gained nothing?

- The U.S. Economy is NOT in a free-fall.

And, thousands of people are NOT losing their jobs in this country.

So far none at Delta Air Lines that didn't volunteer to leave themselves.
I stand corrected.

Thanks.

Your welcome.


YKMKR

Dude, give me a break. I'm not saying Delta is isolated from any of this but in comparison to the rest of the industry, I'd say they're doing above average right now.

 

[~~~^~~~]

National, frankly, isn't in control and does not matter. National is like a Dispatcher that helps you get out of the gate and who's signature is needed, but once out of the chocks the Captain's hands are on the controls.

Our role as a good "First Officer" is to bring concerns to our Captain, hope they take corrective action and after three attempts, scream "MY AIRPLANE" and try to keep the thing from hitting the hillside.

I've repeatedly stated my concerns and for the most part my Captain has told me to STFU. We are now down to the RAT and one hydraulic system, but the jet's still flying. As you pointed out, we will lose an engine when the DC9's go away and there are no jobs behind us to replace them. The other engine is threatened by codeshare out the top end.

When the Company decides they don't need us, the end will be very quick and inevitable. If we continue down this course we probably have one, or two, more contracts, before Delta decides to just fly without us during a contentious round of Section 6 negotiations. This is no exaggeration, look at what's happened in the last 9 years.

They say they will stop it here. A lot of drunks say, "just one more, then I'll stop."

People who know Moak say he is a good guy, will he listen? Maybe a little group of us needs to take him to lunch (or let him take us and expense it).

I'm thinking the Delta MEC Chair (regardless of who it is) has more functional power than ALPA's President.

 

[FBN0223]

Yeah, I thought it was bad when we gave away our flying to Compass and their 36 EMB175s. Now we've given these DCI carriers another 100 plus 76 aircraft.

How do I file a grievance against the kool-aid drinkin', company tool who calls himself Captain Moak? Forget that, I would like to prosecute the little twit for covert representation. Anyone?

 

[~~~^~~~]

FBN - it is possible to file a grievance against your own union. Usually they will not act on it and then your next step is to file a lawsuit against them in open Court. Then they have a pretty much unlimited budget to fight you. Nothing will change and you'll go broke.

You might be surprised to learn there already is a Court case filed over this renegotiation of scope. The RJDC leadership sees this as material breach of their settlement agreement. They see the changes agreed to in the settlement and consider that a renegotiation of Section 1.

ALPA National is the party bound by the settlement agreement and there has been no indication ALPA national was aware of this. In D ALPA's view, it was not a renegotiation and nothing changed.

To me it looks like much ado about nothing. As ACL65 pointed out, the RJ's will be here to stay and those of us at the bottom will stay in the same relative seniority as Delta shrinks to a widebody airline. But that course was set before this most recent reinterpretation.

Both sides to the RJDC battle appear to have agreed to something that neither one of them has the power to enforce. It will be interesting if ALPA national has to act in some way to invalidate an agreement reached by an MEC Chair. I think they do have the power to do that, although that would be an incredibly extreme course of action given the size and power of the Delta MEC / Moak.

The answer has to be taking this flying back. The only way to do that is to include our DCI brothers in ALPA.