WHY there is a strike vote at DL

[General Lee]

Guys, listen to yourself..."if you go out, go out fighting!"... This is critical stuff Delta is coping with, not worthy of a cliche ridden cheerleading section.

And General, I'm looking for clarification. You earlier stated "...Those are all VERY important, and I am willing to sink this thing over SCOPE alone." By 'sink this thing,' do you mean allow Delta to enter Chapter 7?

If so, does this means that you are willing (via potential cause and effect) to allow Delta to liquidate due to a strike? I simply want to understand your context here.

So--and again I'm just trying to understand your logic, not throw stones--that means that you are willing to cause Delta to cease operations because of the implied actions managment could take if the contract is abrogated, scope included.

So---everyone is out of a job, simply because of an implied--and thus far non-articulated--threat to change the scope rules? Even if everything else in your current contract were to be maintained?

I am willing to VOTE NO on any eventual TA that includes scope issues that are not beneicial to our pilot group. The first thing I will vote FOR is a strike IF OUR CONTRACT IS THROWN OUT. That is first and foremost. Then, if a TA is reached, I will vote NO if any SCOPE changes include any airplanes over 70 seats for anyone other than the DL mainline pilots. There are other important issues too that I will not overlook, like sick leave issues and OJI issues. (They don't want to pay you if you get hurt ON THE JOB) Scope is my first priority, but not my only priority. So, again, I will first vote TO STRIKE if they try to take away our contract. Then, if a TA is reached, I will vote NO if scope is loosened to allow larger planes at DCI.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Peanut gallery]

You guys....

Very entertaining stuff. Too bad nobody understands labor law and is forced to react to rumor and ALPA fantasy information. It would be far better to look at the real law and the ramifications of that law. You could then formulate a response that has the highest potential for maintaining the actual sustainable elements of the current contract.
The judge will give the company certain concessions based on demonstated need to survive the bancruptcy process, he does not have the inclination nor total authority to throw out all of the contract. He does have the authority to order the pilots back to work and can terminate any employee that refuses. Of course they usually start with ALPA leadership. He can also jail and fine ALPA leadership.
A strike of any duration if it were sustainable would put DAL out of business, this is clear. My son has been furloughed from UAL since 3/2002 it is not so good on the job front out there, so I would urge you to make your choices wisely. Good luck folks you once had a proud airline that anybody would have been proud to work for. That could be in the future again with the right amount of thought and leadership.

 

[Jetsetter]

You can "SHUT UP also jackass. They won't walk, I don't care how many thousands of people are at stake.

So are you a Delta pilot or not ?? answer the question or stop spouting BS.

 

[General Lee]

Very entertaining stuff. Too bad nobody understands labor law and is forced to react to rumor and ALPA fantasy information. It would be far better to look at the real law and the ramifications of that law. You could then formulate a response that has the highest potential for maintaining the actual sustainable elements of the current contract.
The judge will give the company certain concessions based on demonstated need to survive the bancruptcy process, he does not have the inclination nor total authority to throw out all of the contract. He does have the authority to order the pilots back to work and can terminate any employee that refuses. Of course they usually start with ALPA leadership. He can also jail and fine ALPA leadership.
A strike of any duration if it were sustainable would put DAL out of business, this is clear. My son has been furloughed from UAL since 3/2002 it is not so good on the job front out there, so I would urge you to make your choices wisely. Good luck folks you once had a proud airline that anybody would have been proud to work for. That could be in the future again with the right amount of thought and leadership.

PG,

Yes, it is entertaining, but you also need to know a little bit more about what has happened so far and what was stated by our judge (actually ex-judge--Prudy) and the NW judge. They both stated that the Federal Courts would NOT stop a strike. That has actually happened, nothing being made up here. So, now it comes down to hard core negotiating, and you can just look over to the NW case and see that the judge has given every intention to get this settled, instead of throwing out the contract. Too much is at stake, and not only for the pilots.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[jetfo]

PG,

Yes, it is entertaining, but you also need to know a little bit more about what has happened so far and what was stated by our judge (actually ex-judge--Prudy) and the NW judge. They both stated that the Federal Courts would NOT stop a strike. That has actually happened, nothing being made up here. So, now it comes down to hard core negotiating, and you can just look over to the NW case and see that the judge has given every intention to get this settled, instead of throwing out the contract. Too much is at stake, and not only for the pilots.

Bye Bye--General Lee

A brief strike at both NWA and DAL would actually be good for both airlines, ALPA and this industry and would not spell ch7 or liquidation.

Those could be the consequences of a prolonged strike, which is highly unlikely. There are too many stakeholders that would prevent that.

 

[General Lee]

A brief strike at both NWA and DAL would actually be good for both airlines, ALPA and this industry and would not spell ch7 or liquidation.

Those could be the consequences of a prolonged strike, which is highly unlikely. There are too many stakeholders that would prevent that.

That is correct. Look at what is happening with the NW talks right now, they are continuing. There is way too much at stake, and to top it off, management and the creditors (who are really calling the shots) could lose MILLIONS of $$$ if they can't get the new stock. UAL management got 8% of the new stock, and the creditors got a lot too----and that is how they recoup their losses. Will they allow liquidation over a few issues like scope and maybe a few $$ hundred million in pay differences, when it could be worth hundreds of millions to them? I doubt it. But, you have to call their bluff and show you are willing to strike.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[79%N1]

If GL could only start saying 'I' think, instead of 'we'. You don't speak for everyone at Delta.

Hey, wait a minute, this is the 'Majors' board! What am I doing here? Oops, back to Commuter land!

 

[FDJ2]

Very entertaining stuff. Too bad nobody understands labor law and is forced to react to rumor and ALPA fantasy information. It would be far better to look at the real law and the ramifications of that law. You could then formulate a response that has the highest potential for maintaining the actual sustainable elements of the current contract.
The judge will give the company certain concessions based on demonstated need to survive the bancruptcy process, he does not have the inclination nor total authority to throw out all of the contract.

Wrong. The 1113c motion, if granted, allows management the right to reject the contract.

He does have the authority to order the pilots back to work and can terminate any employee that refuses.

Wrong, the Norris-Laguardia Act specifically prevents a Federal Judge from enjoining a strike. In the context of a labor contract rejection the right to strike has always been upheld.

 

[FDJ2]

Those could be the consequences of a prolonged strike, which is highly unlikely. There are too many stakeholders that would prevent that.

Bingo!

 

[DTW320]

Very entertaining stuff. Too bad nobody understands labor law and is forced to react to rumor and ALPA fantasy information. It would be far better to look at the real law and the ramifications of that law. You could then formulate a response that has the highest potential for maintaining the actual sustainable elements of the current contract.
The judge will give the company certain concessions based on demonstated need to survive the bancruptcy process, he does not have the inclination nor total authority to throw out all of the contract. He does have the authority to order the pilots back to work and can terminate any employee that refuses. Of course they usually start with ALPA leadership. He can also jail and fine ALPA leadership.
A strike of any duration if it were sustainable would put DAL out of business, this is clear. My son has been furloughed from UAL since 3/2002 it is not so good on the job front out there, so I would urge you to make your choices wisely. Good luck folks you once had a proud airline that anybody would have been proud to work for. That could be in the future again with the right amount of thought and leadership.

Wrong. Its an 1113(c) motion. The judge doesn't impose anything. He rules in favor of or against the company's request to throw out the contract. In the case of DAL they have agreed to submit the matter to an arbitration panel that will make the decision that the judge would have made: YES or NO on the company's 1113c motion to set aside the contract.