Originally Posted by Vsop

but can you imagine the great stories they would tell us in a few years?
Did you fly with XYZGuy? Was he like this when he was at mainline?
I think it would go something like:

“I couldn’t believe it! I was getting back to the hotel after a walk. He was in the hotel lobby full uniform on, we weren’t scheduled to leave for another 3 hours.

He was demanding the front desk switch the lobby TV away from the NFL, this was in Green Bay and the packers were playing, because the NFL supported some cause he was opposed to. He was chasing a hotel employee around the lobby constantly complaining that they hadn’t changed the channel yet, and they didn’t have any newspapers out to take and he needed his USAToday.

The poor clerk is trying to avoid him and was briskly walking away. That’s when CA XYZ tripped over one of those hotel carts and scuffed his shoe. He starts demanding that the hotel give him shoe polish or new shoes, and that this crap didn’t happen at the real Delta.

I stupidly, went over and tried to calm him down, but he was out of control waving his arms like a crazy person. That cell phone holster that I thought was glued to his hip flew off his belt and nearly hit the hotel clerk. What a nut!”

Edit: yes I have personally witnessed each of these things individually just not all at once. Also apologies if anyone has the XYZ screen name it was meant as a placeholder.

Originally Posted by Vsop

and they didn’t have any newspapers out to take and he needed his USAToday.

Originally Posted by Gone Flying

0 chance delta will pay protect you to go back a seat because you cannot fly in your current seat.

it would not surprise me if there is some sort of ICAO trigger for flag airlines.

Carte Blanche 67 without ICAO and with no federal guidance would be a cluster of epic proportions. I’m sure airlines have made this clear to Congress via their lobbyists.

Originally Posted by Nick Bradshaw

It will have to be a negotiated settlement. And ALPA will be very willing to negotiate us away rather than face the class action discrimination and DFR lawsuit against them, which will be simultaneously filed. Checkmate. Oh, and Hartmann has set precedent that grievance settlement don't have to go to MEMRAT. So there's that too.

I see most likely a buyout (here comes the min balance we were promised), but short of that pay protection. Worst case we displace to the top of the NB lists.

Originally Posted by CBreezy

Uh. No. DFR doesn't guarantee equality of outcome. No matter how hard you say it. You don't know what you're talking about, again.

Originally Posted by JamesBond

So you believe Ed would rather pay disability at the highest rates for an extra two years and get zero productivity than to pay protect pilots and get them to carry the mail. OK.

Oh, and all 16,000 pilots on the seniority list would be able to play that same game when the time comes. Including you.

That would be a great decision.

But do you think it would be the right thing for alpa to do to lobby to pay protect pilots in that situation? And remember, that would include YOU when the time comes.

Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo

If all the lobbyists and union/associations fail in swaying the vote against the appropriations with the age 67 rider in it, he really doens't have a choice. Disability is defined. So that can't be denied.

You are not going to get pais disability at the highest rate. You'll get paid disability for the seat you can hold at the time you left. So if that happened to be WB A then fine, if you were not able to get on LTD before the music stopped, then it would be NB A. I don't think as a group it will be all that impactful. The juniors will now have a longer career horizon available to them if they so desire to work to 67.

The issue you face is timing. You can gamble, or like me and many others take the less stressful way out. My job here does not define who and what I am, it never did. It was always just a job and means to an end for me and my family. I don't get the angst some of my peer group has over this. No one owes us anything really. We got a good ride, especially with 65. My choice was easy. I understand others not so much. I guess we'll see if and when 67 passes and how that fleshes out in the sausage making. Where you fall when the line is drawn is a total crapshoot.

Originally Posted by JamesBond

So you believe Ed would rather pay disability at the highest rates for an extra two years and get zero productivity than to pay protect pilots and get them to carry the mail. OK.

Originally Posted by JamesBond

Oh, and all 16,000 pilots on the seniority list would be able to play that same game when the time comes. Including you.

That would be a great decision.

But do you think it would be the right thing for alpa to do to lobby to pay protect pilots in that situation? And remember, that would include YOU when the time comes.

Originally Posted by hvydvr

Never fear, said CA immediately commenced rooting around in the trash right there in the lobby and was awarded with a full USA Today on the first dig! Unfortunately, somebody had spit some gum on the first page and there were some stray coffee grounds. He simply removed the first page and pressed.

Originally Posted by JamesBond

You miss the point. There are no dice being rolled. It is a fundamental question as to how alpa would then react to the new law. Would they try to leverage it for the benefit of all pilots or would they cut off the proboscus in order to get rid of the current crop of old guys? THAT would seem to be a pretty good case for a DFR as it would also affect the younger guys as well. How could it be anything but DFR at that point? alpa would be denying an extra two years of income to ALL pilots at that point.

And I an glad for you regarding the last paragraph. It is completely irrelevant to the discussion though.