DL/NWA SLI decision moved to pre-xmas....why?

[enuffalready]

Enuffalready,

I apologize for cracking down on you, I had not right. I assumed a few things about you without actually knowing. I see this profession slowly slipping down the tubes it brings the worst out in me.

Please accept my apologies,
AAflyer

I will have to admit I was about to retract my post because what was not meant to be inflammatory has now become just that. I was just trying to point out to the DC-9 guy that when he makes a post that he wishes all RJ's were parked there are some people out here that make a good living flying them and that if I were to say I wish all DC-9's were parked i would get lambasted

aaflyer-- check your PM's

 

[TNPILOT]

I will have to admit I was about to retract my post because what was not meant to be inflammatory has now become just that. I was just trying to point out to the DC-9 guy that when he makes a post that he wishes all RJ's were parked there are some people out here that make a good living flying them and that if I were to say I wish all DC-9's were parked i would get lambasted

aaflyer-- check your PM's

Fair enough. I think many of us thought you meant that you were hoping to prosper from less mainline flying. Obviously that was not your point. My appologies as well. Apparently "dumb" was the wrong word on my part.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Wow. A kum-bay-yah moment on FI. Maybe YOU guys should negotiate the SLI.

 

[~~~^~~~]

I would not freak out just yet. There is talk but no official decision yet.
Bet the end of the list goes DOH if they do in fact want to shrink it.

Adopting a different methodology for one part of the list, specifically to manipulate furloughs, is a crystal clear abrogation of ALPA's Duty of Fair Representation.

10 to 15% is 1,250 to 1,875 pilots. There are only about 620 "new hires" at the combined airline. It will be impossible not to furlough into the 2001 hires, regardless of the methodology used. But, I do see the compelling reason for the Company to try to avoid pulling seats out of RJ's.

A separate methodology for SLI to protect a preferred group will trigger litigation, just as it has in previous mergers.

I'm unsure whether ACL65's post has to do with insights from ALPA, or from management, or both. People in the know keep quoting this idea of a SLI by ratio with DOH at the bottom. Regardless if this is a Company ploy to try to avoid triggering scope protections, or if this is an ALPA ploy to protect a preferred group of pilots the effect is the same. ALPA has a duty to its members that far exceeds the Company's obligations to its employees.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Neither fin. It has to do with no ones insight. Do not read in to it.

Sorry for stirring a hornet's nest. DAL is staying out of the SLI as it should be. If it is negotiated it is amongst the MEC's and no one else. If it is arbitrated then it is their decision.
Wait and see what cards we are dealt before calling the lawyers.

 

[~~~^~~~]

I'm just pointing out the next iceberg on the horizon if our Captains decide to take the expedient route across the North Atlantic.

Just being a good FO here.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

That is fine, but realize that it is a hypothetical situation until we have a list. Until then it does not matter.
We can talk theory all day, isn't that FI is for?

 

[GogglesPisano]

10 to 15% is 1,250 to 1,875 pilots. .

I'm curious to see if this "flowback" will hold water. I find it hard to believe that DAL would replace just about every pilot at Mesaba and Compass to accomodate all the furloughees. $$$.

 

[DTW320]

I'm curious to see if this "flowback" will hold water. I find it hard to believe that DAL would replace just about every pilot at Mesaba and Compass to accomodate all the furloughees. $$$.

What are we going to accept as a bribe to give up the language?

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Who knows, but do you really think that DAL likes the agreements anyway?
It is easily done away with.