NWA/DAL Pilots reach agrement on SLI...

[JoeMerchant]

bottom line here guys is that we are both ALPA, we both are fighting for the same cause, to get the best contract and most pay, right? In order to effectively do that we need to be getting along and stop the name calling BS. We should be fighting to keep everyone on property both sides, fighting for our stake in the new company, :beer:

Job security and seniority preservation trump industry leading pay and workrules for most people.....The best pay and workrules don't mean squat if you lose your job or take a big hit in seniority.....That's why you are seeing all this infighting....Simply put WE AREN'T FIGHTING FOR THE SAME THING....We are defending our own little piece of turf......

 

[FDJ2]

The problem with that is NWA's scope isn't. Despite the DAL talking points, the NWA contract is binding on the holding company as well as NWA, irregardless of how the transaction occurs.

Additionally, orders AND options are locked in during any transaction. No snaking the 787s away.

Is that in Section 1B of your contract? I believe that section deals with the Joint Venture, Feeder Affiliates and when NWA is the "acquiring" airline.

Doesn't Section 1C of your contract deal with Successorship? I didn't see such a restriction in your successorship language. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that I haven't seen it. Contract language can be hard to understand, so it's quite possible that you have that protection and I just haven't found it. Perhaps you could show us where it is? Here's what I've seen. Forgive the font.

C. [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successorship[/FONT]

C.1. [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]This Agreement shall be binding upon any [/FONT]Complete Transaction S[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]uccessor [/FONT]

For purposes of this Section 1 C., "Complete Transaction Successor" includes [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]but [/FONT]is [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]not limited to, any merged company or companies, purchaser, assign, assignee, transferee, administrator, receiver, executor and/or trustee [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]of the Company resulting from any transaction that involves[/FONT]the t[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]ransfer (in a single transaction or in multi-step transactions) to such Successor of ownership and/or control of all or substantially all of the equity securities [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]of the Company[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman], [/FONT]or all or substantially all of the [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]assets of the Company (hereinafter "Complete [/FONT]Successorship [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Transaction") [/FONT]

C.1.a. [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Such [/FONT]Complete Transaction [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successor shall employ the pilots on the Integrated Pilots System Seniority List in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. [/FONT]


C.1.b. During a period of fenced operations the Company may engage in code sharing with the Complete Transaction Successor pursuant to Section 1 B.7.a.


C.2. Notice to Complete Transaction Successor [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]The Company agrees to give written notice of the terms of this Agreement to a proposed [/FONT]Complete Transaction [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successor before concluding any [/FONT]Complete[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successorship Transaction. The Company agrees that no agreement or other legally binding commitment involving a [/FONT]Complete [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successorship Transaction will be signed or otherwise entered into, unless it is agreed in writing as a material and irrevocable condition of entering into, concluding and implementing such transaction, that this Agreement and recognition of the Association is assumed by the [/FONT]Complete Transaction [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successor(s) and that the pilots on the Integrated Pilots System Seniority List will be employed by the [/FONT]Complete Transaction [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Successor(s) in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. The Company will provide the Association with the details of and material agreements related to any such transaction in a timely manner. The Association shall keep such information and documents confidential pursuant to a mutually agreeable confidentiality agreement, provided that such information and documents may be reviewed by its advisers and may be used in any proceeding brought to compel compliance with or seek remedy for violation of the provisions of this Section 1. [/FONT]

B.7.a. The Company may maintain, amend or extend Code Share Agreements with Domestic Air Carriers, including "Feeder Carriers" (defined in Section 1 B.7.c.(1)) in existence on the date of signing of this Agreement and enter into new Code Share Agreements with Domestic Air Carriers, including Feeder carriers, that permit such carriers other than Northwest Airlines, Inc. to use the Northwest Airlines, Inc. code designator (NW), on a single, dual or multiple designator basis, on one or more of its domestic flights subject to Section 1 B.7.b. For purposes of Section 1 B.7., "Domestic Air Carrier" means an Air Carrier as defined in 49 U.S.C. Section 40102(a)(2). Exception: The Company may place its NW code designator on the international flights of Continental Airlines and Delta Air Lines, as provided in Letter of Agreement 1998-09-01B and Letter of Agreement 2003-01-01A, respectively, for as long as they and the Company are members of the Sky Team Alliance (or any successor global alliance). In addition, if other Domestic Air Carriers are participants in a successor global alliance, the Company may place its NW code designator on the international flights of such carriers subject to similar restrictions as set forth Letter of Agreement 1998-09-01B and Letter of Agreement 2003-01-01A.[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]For purposes of Section 1 [/FONT][FONT=Wingdings,Wingdings]��[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman], a code share agreement shall be defined as an agreement where an airline other than Northwest Airlines, Inc. uses the Northwest Airlines, Inc. designator (NW) on a single, dual or multiple designator basis on one or more of its flights. [/FONT]

 

[Superpilot92]

Job security and seniority preservation trump industry leading pay and workrules for most people.....The best pay and workrules don't mean squat if you lose your job or take a big hit in seniority.....That's why you are seeing all this infighting....Simply put WE AREN'T FIGHTING FOR THE SAME THING....We are defending our own little piece of turf......

you should be because job security and the regionals dont go together:bomb: :nuts: . Also that comment was primarily based between NWA/DAL, while i understand the regionals are alpa as well but thats not what i was talking about.

 

[737 Pylt]

Maybe maybe not. Each side has its own stories and rumors. I am a pretty reasonable person and typically look at all information prior to making my judgment, however in this case it is not possible to gather enough to judge. You guys have a completely opposite view and are either being told the truth or someones interpretation of the truth. Same goes for us at NWA. I dont know. All i know is that there is the DAL side, the NWA side, then there is the "deal" It appears that NONE of us really know the real "deal" We just got a letter today from the MEC saying things are being ironed out and that we shouldn't get to worked up about the rumors, media "experts" i think was the term used. Both DAL and NWA have great experienced ALPA pilots working on behalf of all of us. Is it going to be fair to everyone? No. But again when its all said and done we are all still going to be alpa and on the same team. If this happens I look forward to flying with any DAL pilot and I hope the same mentality is shared by all. Cheers! :beer:

I know some of you might get misty eyed with that stuff so i apologize in advanced especially to 737 Pylt, he is such a softy when it comes to stuff like that.

You're still not getting my bud light!

737

 

[JoeMerchant]

you should be because job security and the regionals dont go together:bomb: :nuts: . Also that comment was primarily based between NWA/DAL, while i understand the regionals are alpa as well but thats not what i was talking about.

....my comment wasn't directed at the regional issue....it was directed at your point regarding NWA/DAL....the same applies to USAIR/AWA....Seniority is too important and thus the resulting turf battles you are witnessing.....All the Rodney King speeches in the world won't change that.....

Remember the 3 most important issues in this business....Seniority, seniority, and seniority....That trumps any Koombaya speech about working together for a great contract....That great contract doesn't address QOL from seniority and it doesn't mean squat if you get furloughed because of seniority....

By the way.....job security and the legacy/majors don't go together either :bomb: :nuts: I expect to see some of y'all in my right seat soon......At about 20 bucks an hour.....

 

[ASA_DFW]

I don't think you will find any Delta pilots going back to ASA. Not worth all the BS you have to deal with.

I think if Delta could dump all of the 50 seat aircraft they would, without hesitation.

 

[Andy]

Oh yeah, this'll be interesting to watch. Let me grab a bag of popcorn ...

The America West/USAirways merge was more cordial than this. Any guess as to how this'll end??

I STILL don't see where merger money's coming from, but GL's assured us that Air France is sending it over by the bagload.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Without being offensive, I think Superpilot92 is a little naive.

NWA/DAL is going to be a blood bath. DAL is asking for things it doesn't intend to share with NWA.

NWA senior pilots want to staple the bottom 3000 DAL guys in order to preserve NWA seniority progression as a result of expected retirements that have now been pushed back another five years.

ALPA fought for AGE 65 so and it should all be remembered that the reason the SLI will be so painful is because ALPA wanted age 65.

Age 65 is now a reality and guess what? SLI has the senior fighting against the junior. Great move ALPA.

DAL/NWA is going to be bloody.

 

[FBN0223]

NWA senior pilots want to staple the bottom 3000 DAL guys in order to preserve NWA seniority progression as a result of expected retirements that have now been pushed back another five years.


DAL/NWA is going to be bloody.

Source?

 

[luckytohaveajob]

News article I read in Feb 2008.

Not rumor but news. Now can the news be rumor, yes, but it was in the news.

The senior NWA pilots have already thrown the junior under the bus and I fully expect them to do it again. And the DAL people know they will have a problem in arbitration after the arbitrator sees all the retirements as a result of the 05 bankruptcy.

 

[JoeMerchant]

I don't think you will find any Delta pilots going back to ASA. Not worth all the BS you have to deal with.

I think if Delta could dump all of the 50 seat aircraft they would, without hesitation.

.....they did last time....Lot's off tough talk until the defecation hits the 6 speed rotary oscillator....then all of a sudden a job becomes important....any job.....

It's a shame they have to start back over again at the bottom....but that is the system we created and we continue to support.....That is why you see these bloodbaths.....Survival instincts trump any perceived union solidarity......

 

[JohnQ]

Remember the 3 most important issues in this business....Seniority, seniority, and seniority....That trumps any Koombaya speech about working together for a great contract....

So you say. Last time I checked, most pilots would claim that pay, work rules, and retirement were more important than just seniority.

Would you fly for free if you could be super-senior? Your post implies such. I know I wouldn't.

 

[JoeMerchant]

So you say. Last time I checked, most pilots would claim that pay, work rules, and retirement were more important than just seniority.

Would you fly for free if you could be super-senior? Your post implies such. I know I wouldn't.

Seniority directly correlates to pay and work rules (schedule).....indirectly it relates to retirement if you have one....For those of us saving for our own retirement it directly affects it through pay.....

I never said I would work for free....If the pay doesn't meet my needs....I will quit....

If seniority wasn't so important...we wouldn't be having these food fights at DAL/NWA, AAA/AWA, NWA/Republic, AA/TWA....etc.....

You say seniority isn't that important....but the facts don't support your premise....

If you take the importance of seniority out of the equation....who will have more solidarity on the other issues.....Otherwise expect more of the same ride reports.....

 

[737 Pylt]

So you say. Last time I checked, most pilots would claim that pay, work rules, and retirement were more important than just seniority.

Would you fly for free if you could be super-senior? Your post implies such. I know I wouldn't.

I guess you haven't met joe yet? He's an officer of the rjdc, an organization who tried to do just that (fly bigger airplanes for basically nothing).

737

 

[andyd]

First off, Joe Merchant.....quit waisting all of our time with your conjecture and opinion, you made your career choice by staying at ASA, keep your trap shut you have no dog in this fight. The rest of us, we have no control over what is happening, the merger will happen whether we want it to or not. Anyone hired after 2001.....don't stress out over what may or may not happen, we have ZERO input or control over what happens.

What we DO all need to do is realize that the other MEC is not our enemy and that managment is playing us like a fine tuned instrument, keep us divided and fighting each other and we won't be strong enough to fight them. What's this bullsh!t 19% "payraise" we all so excited about? Have we all started smoking crack? 19% is about 1/2 of what we gave up to keep this ponzie scheme running the last 6 years....am I the only person who see's this? I am disgusted that we have come to this....but in reality this is RIGHT where they want us.

I for one pledge right here right now.......NOT to play into the negitivity bull******************** against NWALPA vs DALPA....and grant management what they want...a divided pilot group.

 

[Superpilot92]

Without being offensive, I think Superpilot92 is a little naive.

NWA/DAL is going to be a blood bath. DAL is asking for things it doesn't intend to share with NWA.

NWA senior pilots want to staple the bottom 3000 DAL guys in order to preserve NWA seniority progression as a result of expected retirements that have now been pushed back another five years.

ALPA fought for AGE 65 so and it should all be remembered that the reason the SLI will be so painful is because ALPA wanted age 65.

Age 65 is now a reality and guess what? SLI has the senior fighting against the junior. Great move ALPA.

DAL/NWA is going to be bloody.

Feel free to share what you feel is "naive" in my comments?

 

[Superpilot92]

By the way.....job security and the legacy/majors don't go together either :bomb: :nuts: I expect to see some of y'all in my right seat soon......At about 20 bucks an hour.....

Not going to happen, but say what you need to justify your decision to stay at ASA. Good luck with that

 

[JAM-BRO]

BOWOW dude.... you are so DAMN RIGHT!!!! Every single word is 110% correct. Great post.... Someone who really gets what is happening...

First off, Joe Merchant.....quit waisting all of our time with your conjecture and opinion, you made your career choice by staying at ASA, keep your trap shut you have no dog in this fight. The rest of us, we have no control over what is happening, the merger will happen whether we want it to or not. Anyone hired after 2001.....don't stress out over what may or may not happen, we have ZERO input or control over what happens.

What we DO all need to do is realize that the other MEC is not our enemy and that managment is playing us like a fine tuned instrument, keep us divided and fighting each other and we won't be strong enough to fight them. What's this bullsh!t 19% "payraise" we all so excited about? Have we all started smoking crack? 19% is about 1/2 of what we gave up to keep this ponzie scheme running the last 6 years....am I the only person who see's this? I am disgusted that we have come to this....but in reality this is RIGHT where they want us.

I for one pledge right here right now.......NOT to play into the negitivity bull******************** against NWALPA vs DALPA....and grant management what they want...a divided pilot group.

 

[Superpilot92]

First off, Joe Merchant.....quit waisting all of our time with your conjecture and opinion, you made your career choice by staying at ASA, keep your trap shut you have no dog in this fight. The rest of us, we have no control over what is happening, the merger will happen whether we want it to or not. Anyone hired after 2001.....don't stress out over what may or may not happen, we have ZERO input or control over what happens.

What we DO all need to do is realize that the other MEC is not our enemy and that management is playing us like a fine tuned instrument, keep us divided and fighting each other and we won't be strong enough to fight them. What's this bullsh!t 19% "payraise" we all so excited about? Have we all started smoking crack? 19% is about 1/2 of what we gave up to keep this ponzie scheme running the last 6 years....am I the only person who see's this? I am disgusted that we have come to this....but in reality this is RIGHT where they want us.

I for one pledge right here right now.......NOT to play into the negativity bull******************** against NWALPA vs DALPA....and grant management what they want...a divided pilot group.

Thats exactly what i have been saying! Completely agree:beer:

 

[Tref]

Is that in Section 1B of your contract? I believe that section deals with the Joint Venture, Feeder Affiliates and when NWA is the "acquiring" airline.

Doesn't Section 1C of your contract deal with Successorship? I didn't see such a restriction in your successorship language. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that I haven't seen it. Contract language can be hard to understand, so it's quite possible that you have that protection and I just haven't found it. Perhaps you could show us where it is? Here's what I've seen. Forgive the font.

Dude, not too cool posting part of someone else's contract on a public message board.

 

[igneousy2]

Just checked with the negotiating committee. They KNOW which section DAL thinks they have snaked.

But the answer is still "no way". Why? Because both ALPA's and the company's negotiator notes show otherwise.

"Notes?" you say. Yup, each side makes detailed notes during contract negotiations in order to clairify any downline disputes. "But they're only notes!". True, but NWA and ALPA have a long history (precendent setting), that notes are admissible as evidence in arbitration. In each case, the side with the notes on point wins.

So, go ahead and sign off on what you think you might have. Make sure to get a "out" clause that states if something doesn't hold up, you guys keep your cash.

Nu

Whoever you spoke to on the negotiating committee is drinking some pretty strong Kool Aid.

Sure...notes are admissable as evidence...but the arbitrator is free to weigh ALL of the evidence and decide the case.

Other things that can be used as evidence...

past-practice (yours and theirs), industry practice, common usage.

Additionally, things like past-practice, negotiator notes, etc. are generally only used to clarify contract language if the arbitrator feels that the contract language is unclear...if the arbitrator feels that the contract language is clear than all of these other things mean nothing.

The hard thing with notes is that in order for a provision of the contract to be binding...it must be clear that BOTH parties intended the meaning that you are trying to represent in your notes...and usually, your notes represent your thoughts and ideas and how you interpreted what the company said...not necessarily what they meant or were themselves thinking. For notes to be solid evidence, some other supporting evidence is usually required. It is not impossible, and it may be a very strong argument - but it is far from the slam-dunk that your contact on the committee is trying to make it out to be.

Nothing is ever guranteed in an arbitration...it is ALWAYS better to come to a mutually agreed upon solution than to roll the dice in binding arbitration.

 

[Fly4hire]

Sure...notes are admissible as evidence...but the arbitrator is free to weigh ALL of the evidence and decide the case.

You are assuming arbitration.

From the little we know it's leaning towards DALPA exchanged pay for relaxing their section 1 to allow a split operation.

Nu is saying our section 1 does not allow that. There will be a legal challenge that DAL/DALPA (NWA management?) will say it is allowed and NWALPA will say it does not. It will likely end up in court, and possibly arbitration.

The truly sad thing in this is DALPA will have sided with DAL and (possibly NWA) management against another ALPA unit to get their way via an act of betrayal that they could not achieve at the negotiating table.

The rationalizations are all already well articulated here and elsewhere. I won't flame and call it Scab like - it does not rise to that level. It is definitely "conduct unbecoming" at the very least.

I hope that bed you made with management is cozy, because that's the only "friend" you have left.
Anti-union actions like these will be very hard, to recover from in the future. Like the groom that sleeps with another woman on the eve of his wedding, you are forever untrustworthy.

There will be a time in the future where you will need the solidarity of the entire combined pilot group to work together against a common foe. A very, very bad way to start.

 

[JohnQ]

Seniority directly correlates to pay and work rules (schedule).....indirectly it relates to retirement if you have one....For those of us saving for our own retirement it directly affects it through pay.....

I never said I would work for free....If the pay doesn't meet my needs....I will quit....

If seniority wasn't so important...we wouldn't be having these food fights at DAL/NWA, AAA/AWA, NWA/Republic, AA/TWA....etc.....

You say seniority isn't that important....but the facts don't support your premise....

You are partially correct in that these fights do come down to seniority...or the perception that it is "everything." It is not, but unfortunately, pilots may not realize it for years. We at DAL are actually trying to rewrite this tired record, but I am not sure that NWA wants anything different than the old dysfunctional model.

Why do I say that seniority isn't "everything?" Because I would rather be junior at SWA than senior at Frontier. When DAL and Western merged in 1987 there was no arbitration and all that mess. Still, for awhile you had former WAL guys griping about how they got screwed, even though in the next breath they would be pleasantly amazed by the size of their newly-printed DAL paycheck.

Every one of those guys who supposedly lost their sacred seniority could be a widebody international captain by now, if they haven't already retired. Seniority is important, but the perception that you have to give up everything at all costs to protect what you think you have is a losing perspective.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Seniority is important, but the perception that you have to give up everything at all costs to protect what you think you have is a losing perspective.

and again!

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Seniority is important, but the perception that you have to give up everything at all costs to protect what you think you have is a losing perspective.

and again!

 

[~~~^~~~]

From the little we know it's leaning towards DALPA exchanged pay for relaxing their section 1 to allow a split operation.

Nu is saying our section 1 does not allow that. There will be a legal challenge that DAL/DALPA (NWA management?) will say it is allowed and NWALPA will say it does not. It will likely end up in court, and possibly arbitration.

The truly sad thing in this is DALPA will have sided with DAL and (possibly NWA) management against another ALPA unit to get their way via an act of betrayal that they could not achieve at the negotiating table.

We do not know for sure that is the direction that Delta is going. All we have are some news articles which fell short on hard facts.

I do not believe Delta's pilots or management want separate operations. As has been suggested this is probably an interim arrangement to try to maintain the benefits of being a "first mover" and remain ahead of our competition. (could it be that the press got the anti trust immunity issue confused?)

IMHO at the first meeting the DAL pilots sent a French wine and cheese basket and the NWA pilots sent a boarding party with pistols drawn. The NWA had no plan but to battle for the ship. Pulling up the boarding plank is a natural reaction. But this reaction is not a long term course of action. We all benefit from a rational resolution. Getting there will go faster if everyone puts their daggers away.

Litigation is a losing position. If you read the history of such cases, the outcome is nearly always the same. By the time the matter reaches trial the Corporation has moved on. Despite unions' best efforts to prevent job losses through successorship language and scope the desire of the Corporation has prevailed and the rights of the replacement workers are used to justify the Corporation's actions.

Again and again I preach that ALPA's complex and convoluted scope language renders it legally ineffective at binding employers. Both Delta and NWA pilots have contracts with too many holes in them.

My only point is that we can achieve more by working together.

The Delta MEC has been very smart at each stage to maximize leverage by working with other forces.

 

[Fly4hire]

We do not know for sure that is the direction that Delta is going. All we have are some news articles which fell short on hard facts.

This is true of everything we have heard in the press, yet DALPA is guilty of attempting to negotiate in the press. If we say it, it's untrue, yet your spin is accurate? The "boarding party", favoring arbitration' 3000 junior DAL stapled on our part is nonsense as much as saying we were given a completely fair and balanced offer.

The truth is somewhere in the middle, and I would argue we are in Mexican Standoff where DALPA thinks they might get the drop. Not exactly a sound strategy either.

As has been suggested this is probably an interim arrangement to try to maintain the benefits of being a "first mover" and remain ahead of our competition.

Except after a merge "us" is "you", and we are not the competition - the other guy is. Making your partners in crime the competition usually ends messily.

IMHO at the first meeting the DAL pilots sent a French wine and cheese basket and the NWA pilots sent a boarding party with pistols drawn.

Yeah, but I heard the wine was laced with arsenic, and the basket was a Trojan Horse. Also the unprepared stuff of the first meeting was because NWA management was negotiating with DAL management, DALPA was privy, and NWALPA was kept in the dark by our own management. DALPA could of given us the heads up as well, but chose to exploit it instead. Sort of like showing up for a scheduled scrimmage and finding out it's the bowl game. Our managers play really dirty. It would be wise to recall where RA came from. That was 1st down DALPA in the 1st qtr. History at this point.

Getting there will go faster if everyone puts their daggers away.

Concur!! That also means stopping the "who has a bigger dagger and who slipped it out of the hilt first" stuff. Bottom line is we can both make each other bleed fatally regardless of who draws first blood.

My only point is that we can achieve more by working together.

That also means you have to chose sides - if you chose to partner with your management against us good luck convincing us you have any of our interests in mind. Personally I think DALPA is being played like a fiddle by RA. Waaaaay too trusting.

The Delta MEC has been very smart at each stage to maximize leverage by working with other forces.

Leverage against whom, for whose benefit?

At the end of the day, we will need to stand shoulder to shoulder against much larger forces than our SLI squabbles.

That does not mean we simply acquiesce to DALPA terms in order to accomplish that.

 

[dtfl]

This is true of everything we have heard in the press, yet DALPA is guilty of attempting to negotiate in the press.

Really?? Thats interesting considering DALPA has HARDLY released ANYTHING during these negotiations! Even DALPA members are irritated at that.