News story on SLI NWA and Delta

[Schwanker]

Why was it your guys who were asked to provide an alternate plan (dynamic seniority) while insisting DOH with 10 year fences was still their position? If things were the way you believe, it seems like our guys would have been asked (told) to present an alternate plan as well. During the hearings your guys basically said, "our position is still DOH but if we can't get that, dynamic seniority would be better than the DL position." WTF? The DL attorney was going to cross on dynamic seniority when the arbitrator basically told him "no need". I can't see the arbitrators granting a dynamic list that basically separates the groups for 15 years and starts with 3000 DL guys on the bottom.

The two sides spent a couple weeks negotiating under mediation in DC. Do you really think our side didn't move because of fear of retribution? I guarantee there was movement by both sides but obviously not enough to get a deal. I haven't seen our guys waiver in public position however, which indicates a confidence in that position to me.

Noserider,
Is is possible this is where the mediated negotiations were heading? Is it possible DALPA couldn't "agree" to this negotiated settlement to save face with there membership? Is it possible this was a way to introduce it in arbitration so it could be a method to award the new list? Is it possible the dynamic was basically agreed to in mediated negotiations, but the category/ratio positions were not quite ironed out? Dec 8 just may answer these questions to the affirmative.

You asked, "Do you really think our side didn't move because of fear of retribution?"
Answer: Yes, it is quite possible your side did not want to give the appearance of caving.

Best,
Schwanker

 

[michael707767]

=Riddle me this: When the arbitrators tell each group that they are not going to get their initial position, and only one group presents alternate ideas while the other group sticks its feet in the sand, which one seems more likely to get a positive result?

if the arbitrators do their job, it should not matter where either side is with their proposal. Fair is fair. ALPA policy is ALPA policy. The list the arbitrators come up with should be independant of what either side wants.

If the arbitrators somehow use the award to punish one side or the other for not moving off thier position, they have not done thier jobs.

 

[Noserider76]

Noserider,
Is is possible this is where the mediated negotiations were heading? Is it possible DALPA couldn't "agree" to this negotiated settlement to save face with there membership? Is it possible this was a way to introduce it in arbitration so it could be a method to award the new list? Is it possible the dynamic was basically agreed to in mediated negotiations, but the category/ratio positions were not quite ironed out? Dec 8 just may answer these questions to the affirmative.

You asked, "Do you really think our side didn't move because of fear of retribution?"
Answer: Yes, it is quite possible your side did not want to give the appearance of caving.

Best,
Schwanker

Anything is possible. Both sides spent hours under mediation with the arbitrators and only one side was asked to present an alternate proposal. From the reaction of the DL attorney to the dynamic list I'd say it and the methods the NW side used to achieve it weren't too well thought of on this side. Why 15 years?

I also believe our side is much more worried about getting a fair deal done for both sides than the appearance of caving. Moak is a Marine. He's used to making the hard decisions. By all accounts we weren't that far off an agreement on ratios several times in this process. He's just not willing to sign off on something blatantly unfair in the name of unity.

I happen to believe we'll all be better off with a single list that takes all issues into account. You'll share some of your earlier retirements, we'll share some bigger equipment and later retirements, and we'll all be exposed to some older smaller equipment. My opinion only here but this is a horse trade. You have a few more earlier retirements and 787s. In return for sharing those you get guys on 757s and 767s (higher pay) who were going to be -9 and 320 guys for a long time, new bases, and to split the downside if any older equipment is dispatched.

If the dynamic list is the answer though, it needs to last as long as the most junior guy on both properties to be remotely fair.

 

[General Lee]

Noserider,
Is is possible this is where the mediated negotiations were heading? Is it possible DALPA couldn't "agree" to this negotiated settlement to save face with there membership? Is it possible this was a way to introduce it in arbitration so it could be a method to award the new list? Is it possible the dynamic was basically agreed to in mediated negotiations, but the category/ratio positions were not quite ironed out? Dec 8 just may answer these questions to the affirmative.

You asked, "Do you really think our side didn't move because of fear of retribution?"
Answer: Yes, it is quite possible your side did not want to give the appearance of caving.

Best,
Schwanker

Caving? You guys aren't providing reliable information. Like this cute memo for Dave Stevens:

Turning to tab 26, there is a
17 question about a number of pilots that are
18 going to be furloughed by Northwest on a
19 stand-alone basis.
20 Can you tell me what tab 26 tells
21 us?
22 A. Yes. This is a copy of an e-mail
23 that was provided to the Delta MEC
24 administration by Delta management. And what
25 the e-mail states is that if you start at the

2 bottom, you see that Mr. Becker of labor
3 relations at Northwest asked if the pilots
4 received specific aircraft type and numbers.
5 When you read the message it says
6 "yes" several times. And the important point
7 is the fifth line down, estimated 250 to 300
8 furloughs.
9 Q. That's really all I have on that.
10 Just let's get the date in the record. That
11 e-mail exchange was in June of 2008?
12 A. Yes, the e-mail was in June and in
13 the first line it says, "Approximately one
14 month ago I advised Dave Stevens of the
15 pending cuts in flying levels, including the
16 fact that approximately 15 to 20 757s and
17 A-320s would be sold. Two weeks ago in a
18 conference call with the MEC officers and
19 negotiating committee we gave them more
20 specifics, including selling 14 aircraft; 10
21 757s and four A-320s, and estimated 250 to 300
22 furloughs."

Answering "I don't recall" when asked about possible furloughs makes it real tough. Yeah, I guess we should cave.....


Bye Bye---General Lee