DALPA Conflict of Interest

[ACL65PILOT]

God I leave for a few hours and it is the same crap.

 

[michael707767]

Truly Amazing!!!!

How is it truly amazing? It is amazing to me that intelligent people could read ALPA policy, which makes no mention of DOH as a consideration, sign an agreement that our arbitrators will rule based on ALPA policy, and then make nothing but a DOH argument.

Look, if you can justify any pilot going ahead of any other pilot for a reason other than DOH, fine. Give me the reasons and I would consider them.

The day you got hired at NW means nothing. The day I got hired at Delta means nothing. It is what has happened since then, and what is most likely to happen going forward, that matters.

 

[JoeMerchant]

How is it truly amazing? It is amazing to me that intelligent people could read ALPA policy, which makes no mention of DOH as a consideration, sign an agreement that our arbitrators will rule based on ALPA policy, and then make nothing but a DOH argument.

Look, if you can justify any pilot going ahead of any other pilot for a reason other than DOH, fine. Give me the reasons and I would consider them.

The day you got hired at NW means nothing. The day I got hired at Delta means nothing. It is what has happened since then, and what is most likely to happen going forward, that matters.

Michael, for arguments sake, let's say Virgin America was ALPA. Your using a "relative seniority" argument.....The senior most Virgin America pilot has what....1-2 years with the company....Where would he go in your version of a "fair" list if Delta and Virgin America merged?

 

[JoeMerchant]

I think that you can make a case either way, from either side. Strict interpretation of ALPA merger policy says yes in this case.

Is there a reason you are involved in something which has nothing to do with you? You seem much more interested in Delta goings on than ASA. Wee wee envy I guess. Most of the guys I fly with that know you pretty much all agree on that. Is there anybody over there that likes you?

I don't envy anything about this fustercluk.....I just enjoy pointing out the failures of ALPA....and merger policy is at the top of the list!

I also like to question "conventional wisdom" and make people think....Everyone should be thinking about ALPA merger policy and the failures within it...

 

[FDJ2]

.Is it fair to put a NWA 1999 hire below a 2007 Delta hire?

Is it fair that a 1999 peso is worth less than a 2007 euro?

What does the date the coin was minted have to do with comparing the equities inherent in each coin?

This is what matters and you'll notice that DOH is never mentioned. So the question really is, what's the value of a job a 1999 NWA pilot brings to the merger and what's the value of the job a 2007 DAL pilot brings to merger.

1. The merger representatives shall carefully weigh all the equities inherent in their merger situation. In joint session, the merger representatives should attempt to match equities to various methods of integration until a fair and equitable agreement is reached, keeping in mind the following goals, in no particular order:

a. Preserve jobs.

b. Avoid windfalls to either group at the expense of the other.

c. Maintain or improve pre‑merger pay and standard of living.

d. Maintain or improve pre‑merger pilot status.

e. Minimize detrimental changes to career expectations.

 

[PCL_128]

Michael, for arguments sake, let's say Virgin America was ALPA. Your using a "relative seniority" argument.....The senior most Virgin America pilot has what....1-2 years with the company....Where would he go in your version of a "fair" list if Delta and Virgin America merged?

You know very well that ALPA merger policy takes career expectations into account while prohibiting windfalls for either side. In the case of a legacy merger with a carrier like Virgin America, a ratio wouldn't be a fair integration. You have to look at each situation individually. Simply demanding DOH for all situations is absurd.

 

[JoeMerchant]

You know very well that ALPA merger policy takes career expectations into account while prohibiting windfalls for either side. In the case of a legacy merger with a carrier like Virgin America, a ratio wouldn't be a fair integration. You have to look at each situation individually. Simply demanding DOH for all situations is absurd.

Actually in the case I used.....DOH would be better for the Delta pilots than any ratio with Virgin....Their senior pilot only has a little over a year....

Back to your "career expectations" BS.....Did the 1999 Northwest hire have less "expectations" then the 2007 Delta hire? How about the NWA pilot who hired into a Southern Metroliner with 19 seats and props? What was his career expectations?

Just stirring the pot and challenging conventional wisdom....

 

[JoeMerchant]

Is it fair that a 1999 peso is worth less than a 2007 euro?

What does the date the coin was minted have to do with comparing the equities inherent in each coin?

Point out DOH.

1. The merger representatives shall carefully weigh all the equities inherent in their merger situation. In joint session, the merger representatives should attempt to match equities to various methods of integration until a fair and equitable agreement is reached, keeping in mind the following goals, in no particular order:

a. Preserve jobs.

b. Avoid windfalls to either group at the expense of the other.

c. Maintain or improve pre‑merger pay and standard of living.

d. Maintain or improve pre‑merger pilot status.

e. Minimize detrimental changes to career expectations.

We are different than all other professions....Most other professions respect time of service or longevity....Your right....we don't.....and that is our downfall....That is why we have such ugly mergers and this one is going down the same road.....

You defend "status quo"....I think "status quo" is our downfall......

 

[PCL_128]

Actually in the case I used.....DOH would be better for the Delta pilots than any ratio with Virgin....Their senior pilot only has a little over a year....

Agreed, but would a DOH integration be fair to the VA pilot? These things are complicated, and one-size-fits-all policies don't work. That's why we have ALPA merger policy.

Back to your "career expectations" BS.....Did the 1999 Northwest hire have less "expectations" then the 2007 Delta hire?

I'm not really arguing for either side in this specific case. I've tried my best to stay out of this DAL/NWA debate from the get-go. I'm only arguing the purpose of the ALPA merger policy and why it is far more appropriate than what you seem to advocate: a one-size-fits-all strategy.

Just stirring the pot

Yes, we know. That's all you ever do. You don't care about real solutions and advancing the profession, you only care about attacking ALPA at every opportunity.

 

[Scope out RJ's]

The terms "fair" and "career expectations" are in eye of the beholder......Using "fair" and "career expectations" as cornerstone of any merger policy is a recipe for failure and will result in a group that isn't unified.....

This is going just about the way I expected....The fireworks will really start after the decision and the furloughs start....Someone pass the popcorn.....

Don't you have someone to sue? Don't worry joey, you'll get the memo when DL starts to talk of scope again!