Tentative agreement reached

[Texx]

Harris is by the book. Not sure about Horowitz.

 

[michael707767]

Michael, read section 6.G. If I read it correctly, if the third party nuetrals reject our PWA, we still retain the same rights as if the court rejected our PWA through the 1113 motion, with the exception of certain appeals processes. Those rights I believe include the right to strike if our PWA is rejected. It's also my understanding that ALPA got to choose 2 of the 3 nuetrals.

Let me know if you draw the same conclusion.

I disagree. First of all, thats not how I read it. Second, I think the very fact that we ahve agreed to arbitration on the rejection of our contract could be used against us in court. How hard would it be to go to a judge and get an injunction against a strike when they can honestly say, "your honor they agreed to abide by the arbitrators decision"?

 

[surplus1]

Outside opinion:

1: The DMEC has given up its leverage of a strike threat, which was the only leverage it had.

2: The arbitration agreement negates the collective bargaining process and renders the union impotent. Very bad precedent not only for Delta pilots but for everyone else.

3. The LOA and the arbitration agreement are both conspicuous by the absence of any reference to Scope. Either the company took it off the table or it's not considered to be important any more.

4. The company does not appear to have any further incentive to reach an agreement; all they have to do is arbitrate. They are now only 4.5% - 5% away from their goal of 19.5 % on pay rates and the only outstanding issues important enough to mention seem to be the "A" Plan and profit sharing.

We live in interesting times. So much for the idle threats, the rethoric of Woerth and the "union's" solidarity.

My guess: It will pass. The game is over and the company can announce victory.

 

[MickeySlapnutz]

Does anyone honestly think the Delta pilots will vote this down? It's only a matter of how much over 51% vote "yes".

Face it guys...when it comes to putting up "the good fight for the sake of the profession"....it's always gonna be what the other guy needs to do. When it was time for the pilots at DAL,NWA,UAL,AA or USAirways to "walk the line"...it was all huff and puff with a little whimper at the end.

I'm not saying they were wrong or right in how they voted and the TA's the MEC's brought forward. I just get tired of hearing the rank and file puff out their chest and yell and scream about what needs to be done...except when they are the ones who are up to bat at the plate.

Anyway you look at if guys, its just a matter of time until you and your pals have to take a big bite from the sheet sandwich. Enjoy. I already had mine.

 

[Mookie]

"General, your silence on this subject is creeping me out....."

He's in the HRSA psyche ward in ATL...

Mookie

 

[rtmcfi]

bump for the general.....

 

[FDJ2]

I disagree. First of all, thats not how I read it.
Second, I think the very fact that we ahve agreed to arbitration on the rejection of our contract could be used against us in court. How hard would it be to go to a judge and get an injunction against a strike when they can honestly say, "your honor they agreed to abide by the arbitrators decision"?

Michael, I respect your opinion, but I disagree and this is why. The arbitrators will only decide whether to deny or grant the companies motion to reject the CBA. They would in essense be assuming Judge Beatty's roll in this matter. Remember, the matter at issue is whether or not the company can reject its CBA with its pilots. Nothing more and nothing less, not whether or not we can execute our right to self help, and that was exactly what Judge Beatty's roll was.

6. D., the Association and the Company will promptly proceed to submit the matter at issue in the Company’s section 1113 motion to binding decision by a third party neutral panel, under the following terms and conditions:

Both the company and the Association retain their rights following the decision, with a minor appeals exception. That includes the right to self help.

G. The parties will have the same rights following a rejection decision by the third party neutral panel as following a rejection decision by the bankruptcy court, except that appeal rights will be limited to those set forth in paragraph 6. E. (4) of this Letter of Agreement. The Association members will have the same voting rights with respect to a comprehensive agreement as they do at present, whether the comprehensive agreement is reached before or after a rejection decision.

I'm not saying that I support this TA or that it is a good deal, but I disagree that the right to self help is taken off the table.

As far as it being a slam dunk that the Company could get an injunction against a strike, I very much doubt it. As a matter law the Norris-La Guardia Act denies federal courts the power to so, even Judge Beatty acknowledges that she is not empowered to enjoin a strike.

 

[grog_sit_reserv]

He's in the HRSA psyche ward in ATL...

Mookie

Damn that's funny! Unless its true..... Holy Crap!

 

[michael707767]

Michael, I respect your opinion, but I disagree and this is why.

Fair enough. I respectfully disagree and maintain my opinion. However, knowing you and trusting your views, I am going to look long and hard at it again to see if I am wrong. Even if you are correct, I think this TA takes away some of our leverage if only by pushing off a potential strike till after the holidays.

Surplus, the only items covered in this TA are pay items. Nothing else was covered and remains to be negotiated. However, as I said I think this TA takes away our teeth and I am not optomistic.

 

[Helos2Galaxy]

Puhleeze, let's vote NO and draw the line in the sand here.

Why give 15% and then go to arbitration? Who's BSing who; we're not going to reach some agreement this Winter.

I am voting NO