DAL junior Pilots sold down the river by NEW MEC

[Fly4hire]

No, I don't see this as a true gain, nor do I see this as a major change in scope. It's a compromise/settlement.

Could this have been handled better? YES. Would the end result have been the same? Probably.

more RJs this year. The company is authorized 255 70/76 seaters, they have 224 with no more 76 seaters scheduled for delivery above the 153rd.

First, despite the established Grievance Settlement Process, there was nothing to prevent Moak from taking it to the MEC. If it was such a good deal why not run it past the voting members of the MEC? It might have made quite a statement if the entire MEC had said hell no.

Second it allows delivery of acft that would have put us over 120, but were not all present. This was major leverage to force those acft to be delivered as a 70 seater, and we pissed it away.

Grievance resolution usually involves a cease and desist and an award for the violation -we gave them $%$@# permission to add airframes not yet on the property in exchange for a very flimsy NF clause.

Third, if, as the Contract Awareness memo stated:

While the Association feels confident that our interpretation of Section 1 B. 40. d. and e. is correct,

Then why not take it to arbitration and let the judge decide?

there always remain several elements of risk whenever an issue is decided through arbitration.

Wahhhh....my vagina hurts...this from a our highly touted former Marine Fighter Pilot MEC Ch? There's risk every time we take off and land. Better stay in bed.....

 

[FDJ2]

I would have rather it have been fought tooth and nail and lost in arbitration than have just given in and gotten worthless "furlough protection."

It might feel good to go down fighting, but does that really serve the interests of the pilot group? The ramifications of codifying the company's interpretation of our scope clause could potentially be more detrimental to the pilot group than reaching a negotiated settlement which grandfathers what they have coming up to 153, but codifies our interpretation of our scope clause into the future.

Couldn't Moak have at least fought to bring everyone under the 9/11 "furlough protection?"

He essentially did. It's not a no furlough clause subject to force majeure, it's a powerful economic penalty if any DAL pilot is furloughed. Some say it's chocked full of wholes, yet no one can point to the wholes.

I absolutely understand the DALPA "third rail" which is scope relief, but it is not spin to point out that there was no change in our scope language and that there can be legitimate disagreements over contractual language. That's the nature of all grievances.

 

[~~~^~~~]

FDJ2:

I posted to you on the previous page and I hope you'll answer. Also, what is the view on Compass? Do we want them on the Delta list? Waiting for the Company to ask?

 

[scarlet]

This is what ALPA has done for all airlines=NOTHING !

And to think Airtran pilots want ALPA??? Why 100-200 guys think ALPA is king. Ask ASA,Comair,TWA,Pinnancle,USAir, and the list continues. CAL contract??? ALL a BIG JOKE !!!

 

[FDJ2]

First, despite the established Grievance Settlement Process, there was nothing to prevent Moak from taking it to the MEC. If it was such a good deal why not run it past the voting members of the MEC? It might have made quite a statement if the entire MEC had said hell no.

It could have been handled differently, but that doesn't mean the result would have been different.

Second it allows delivery of acft that would have put us over 120, but were not all present. This was major leverage to force those acft to be delivered as a 70 seater, and we pissed it away.

The limit was not 120 aircraft at DCC. 120 was the starting point based on the number of aircraft in the fleet above 440+N. At DCC DAL had 444 aircraft, which under ALPA's interpretation authorized the company to put 132 76 seaters into service at DCC, the company however interpretted the limit to be based on the high water mark, ref. paragraph e. of the applicable scope section, Under the company's interpretation they were able to capture the number of 76 seaters based on Delta's fleet in March 08 when they made their orders.

Grievance resolution usually involves a cease and desist and an award for the violation -we gave them $%$@# permission to add airframes not yet on the property in exchange for a very flimsy NF clause.

That depends on the grievance and the award.

Third, if, as the Contract Awareness memo stated:

Then why not take it to arbitration and let the judge decide?

Ask the AAA pilots. I'm sure many fNWA pilots were confident in DOH.

 

[Morning Wood]

Whats even more sad is when you talk to pilots who fly these regional jets, they are even more excited that they are getting growth. But they dont realize that an the end they are destroying the very majors they want to work for. Actually can anyone on this board tell me of a furlough clause that actually has worked? I have looked over many airlines, many of them with similiar protections only to have it blown out of the water in court! Why cant a binding contract be upheld for major airline pilots? Do you guys truely believe its the fault of the unions or the courts? I think that if airlines could just be big holding companies they would given the chance. Outsource regional flying to XYZ airlines, then domestic to ABC airlines, and then codeshare via international with cheaper counterparts.

The pilots at the regional level have no more control over what airplanes or how many get operated than the pilots at mainline who are allowing it to happen.

 

[Fly4hire]

Then why not take it to arbitration and let the judge decide?

Ask the AAA pilots. I'm sure many fNWA pilots were confident in DOH.

Lame. Does this mean DALPA runs from all fights rather than risk getting a black eye?

Never mind the answer.....

 

[FDJ2]

Then why not take it to arbitration and let the judge decide?



Lame. Does this mean DALPA runs from all fights rather than risk getting a black eye?

Never mind the answer.....

We took you to arbitration, although that wasn't much of a fight.

 

[Superpilot92]

He essentially did. It's not a no furlough clause subject to force majeure, it's a powerful economic penalty if any DAL pilot is furloughed. Some say it's chocked full of wholes, yet no one can point to the wholes.

I absolutely understand the DALPA "third rail" which is scope relief, but it is not spin to point out that there was no change in our scope language and that there can be legitimate disagreements over contractual language. That's the nature of all grievances.

You're still avoiding the question that multiple people have asked you so i will ask again,

At what point will the MEC stand up and tell mgmt enough is enough with outsourcing our careers? Do we have a MEC that believes in stopping it? Does Moak really believe, "rjs are good for our careers"? Has he said that? If they wont stand up for the group as a whole and IF he has said or believes that, then he needs to be removed from his position. This career choice has been degraded by scope relief and has done nothing good for our industry. Scope relief has reduced our jobs, reduced our pay, eliminated upgrades and career earnings. Also most people who commute are now subject to commuting on rjs that are restricted or they dont have priority on because the domestic feed has essentially been GIVEN up by "leaders" in ALPA. Moak and Co included. The NWA side is to blame too i admit but we all can see that scope relief is a HUGE problem and we need people who will literally fight to stop it IF mgmt pushes the issue.

I welcome your response. Thanks

 

[Fly4hire]

We took you to arbitration, although that wasn't much of a fight.

Spare me the DMC - at least we stood our ground and didn't just role over and play dead. We still did way better than what you had intended for us in the opener. So what are you telling me - our MEC only fights for your rights when you are sure you can beat the other guy up?

 

[FlyingSig]

If you think that's absurd, just think back about three and a half years ago, when we were in BK, flying for an insolvent carrier, with over 1,300 furloughed pilots, the suggestion than, that not only would we recall every pilot in the next three years, but we would hire nearly 800 more, double our international capacity, have scheduled deliveries that would double our 777 fleet all while working for viable airline also seemed absurd.

FDJ2, I've enjoyed your posts on this thread, you've a voice of reason amongst the panic and I agree with you whole heatedly on this particular issue.

However your memory of some of our history is a little foggy. 3 1/2 years ago makes it Aug '05. Recalls had been already happening at a good clip. I had been recalled in May of '05 and I was TK+560 (with bypass pilots I'd say we had about 700 furloughs on property). We wouldn't declare Ch11 for another month. Times were grim, but I beg to differ that the reason for Ch11 was an immediate insolvency vs. an inability to compete and thrive against other bankrupt carriers and cut costs (all while spending our LOA 48 cost reductions on Simplifares and not revenue enhancements). The only time during our Ch11 that true insolvency was even a remote possibility was at the peak of the 1113 trial when neither ALPA nor Delta knew if we'd be allowed to excercise self help.

 

[FlyingSig]

Spare me the DMC - at least we stood our ground and didn't just role over and play dead. We still did way better than what you had intended for us in the opener. So what are you telling me - our MEC only fights for your rights when you are sure you can beat the other guy up?

I dunno, compare the difference between our opener for you and your opener for us and then get back to me on that....

.... Seems to me like this settlement was signed off on after one MEC was elected. You keep saying it's Moak's baby, but I know how Moak leads and he's not a go solo type. Who's our Vice-Chairman? Who's our Secretary? Oh yeah, fNWA... sorry dude, unless you have proof that this was a solo deal your boys signed off on this too.

 

[Fly4hire]

Oh yeah, fNWA... sorry dude, unless you have proof that this was a solo deal your boys signed off on this too.

Reps were informed, not consulted - fDAL included. Maybe a few knew - I don't know. I was under the distinct impression that C44 among other were completely unaware of this settlement until briefed at the Sp MEC Mtg......while covered under the greivance process, it appears most Reps, fNWA and fDAL are unhappy with the settlement.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

I see that too. I have also been given responses that indicated that is was Moak's deal. Now today it seems that they are saying it went though the normal channels. What give? Are you doing damage control?

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Reps were informed, not consulted - fDAL included. Maybe a few knew - I don't know. I was under the distinct impression that C44 among other were completely unaware of this settlement until briefed at the Sp MEC Mtg......while covered under the greivance process, it appears most Reps, fNWA and fDAL are unhappy with the settlement.

The question is when were they informed?

It was filed prior to when we had a joint MEC. When was the new MEC read in on it. After the deal was done??
There is a lot of issues with something like this taking place like it did when it did.

 

[NuGuy]

Spare me the DMC - at least we stood our ground and didn't just roll over and play dead. We still did way better than what you had intended for us in the opener. So what are you telling me - our MEC only fights for your rights when you are sure you can beat the other guy up?

In seemingly unrelated news, the FAs have decided that they will merge their lists by DOH.

This was published in the Delta Daily Dribble. I'm surprised more wasn't made of it.

Nu

 

[Cobraair75drvr]

You were confident in your posistion only after you cut and run in the spring. You were not so confident then and that cost us, all of us money and a better contract. Your fear of arbitration then led to loa19, which was a tradeoff btw King Moak and RA for a less costly contract but with his assurance that the company would not accept any sli(final say) that would put the y'all at an disadvantage due to the demographics. This is the only reason y'all all of a sudden embraced arbitration, albeit with a worse contract but insurance on seniority.

We took you to arbitration, although that wasn't much of a fight.

 

[Voice Of Reason]

You all need to be rid of Moak AND his cronies like yesterday. Not just talk on a msg board, but actually showing up to meetings and doing it (even on your day off).

What was this I read somewhere on ALPC that Bastian is Moak's "partner" for some walk in Moak's hometown (MSY)???? Is that %^& for REAL????

Sounds like some outspoken FNWA guys with backbones (not the former leaders) are needed to clear the union of any mgt lackeys, INSANE

It is also insane, with you guys worrying about furloughs, not only is this backstabbing going on, but it is seen as acceptable for ANYONE to be picking up overtime right now???????

Overtime equals to hours that comprise MORE (or your junior pilots') JOBS. WTF is happening to this industry here pilots now think this is acceptable ever???????????

Yeah, pick up overtime for YOURSELF so you can still make LESS than you SHOULD BE making right now..people just don't get it whatsoever.

Anyone? Is this true? Sounds like a great DEAL more than conflict of interest. Heads should be rolling....

 

[GogglesPisano]

The story I was told was that the MEC Chair is the "Grievant" in all greivances. Therefore they are settled to his satisfaction.

In related news ...

Delta CEO gives bleak assessment of demand
Delta Air Lines chief gives bleak assessment of air travel demand
Harry R. Weber, AP Airlines Writer
Thursday February 12, 2009, 6:50 pm EST
Yahoo! Buzz Print Relatedelta Air Lines Inc.
ATLANTA (AP) -- The chief executive officer of Delta Air Lines Inc. gave a bleak assessment Thursday of demand for air travel amid the enormous financial strain that many Americans have been under in recent months.

In a recorded message to employees, CEO Richard Anderson did not specifically say the world's biggest carrier plans to cut more jobs or capacity than previously announced, though he did suggest the erosion in demand that the airline has seen has been very difficult.

"Passengers, our customers, are not buying tickets at rates they were buying tickets a year ago," Anderson said. "Obviously, we wish we didn't have to decrease our capacity, but we cannot fly our airplanes around at low load factors."

Atlanta-based Delta has previously said it expected about 2,000 employees to accept the company's latest round of severance offers that were made due to its plans to reduce systemwide capacity in 2009 by 6 percent to 8 percent. The window for employees to accept the severance offers closed at midnight Wednesday.

Anderson did not say in his message late Thursday how many employees accepted the offers or how many jobs the company would ultimately cut.

He did say that Delta would work through the numbers and look at who has chosen to take the packages and align that with the airline's needs.

Anderson said Delta needs to right-size the airline based on customer demand.

"The economy is very difficult," Anderson said. "It seems every day we read about companies announcing layoffs by the thousands."

He said customers are tightening their belts, not spending as much on vacations. As a result, Anderson said Delta will need to react quickly.

"A strong, durable airline is truly the only job security for all of us," Anderson said.

The voluntary severance payout offers were made to a majority of the 75,000 employees at Delta and Northwest's mainline operations.

The program is similar to one earlier in 2008 that Delta used to trim about 4,000 jobs. Northwest Airlines previously trimmed jobs of its own before being acquired by Delta on Oct. 29.

Delta and Northwest's mainline operations include 75,000 employees. The entire company, including regional subsidiaries Comair, Mesaba and Compass, has about 85,000 employees. The 12,000 pilots of Delta and Northwest, as well as certain management and administrative employees, are not eligible for the voluntary severance programs.

EmailIM Bookmarkdel

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

You all need to be rid of Moak AND his cronies like yesterday. Not just talk on a msg board, but actually showing up to meetings and doing it (even on your day off).

This is elementary.... and basic... and minimal....

So what happens when you oust Moak and the Cronies? What then? Do you have a political ally to replace him? Even if you do, do you have the structure in place to monitor and police said replacement...




You guys aren't getting it.....


Our whole system of "Pilots Vote, ALPA Officers Rule" isn't working... Even if you do vote, there must be constant vigilance and monitoring of union activities.

Guys like General Lee and others are getting wrapped up in the details of RJ size and number of seats..


What you need to be figuring out is how you are going to be effective in stopping the scope slide and getting it back...