A6danimal

Caution! the following is a rant that nobody ('cept maybe grammar hawks and lawyer-language-haters) cares about, nor should you. I refer you to my disclaimer at the end of my previous post.

Why the hockey-sticks (no offense, Hockey) did we line out six lines about paint except the word "aircraft", then add a "No" in front of it and then many lines later finish the sentence with "will be flown by less than 2 pilots" instead of just lining out the whole thing and writing the new sentence so that it could be easily read in one place? Is there some secret handshake about not wasting any words that can be reused?

And if so, shouldn't we have re-used the word "in" in section 1 d 8 b 1) ? Although we would have had to capitalize it, so maybe not ...

Nevermind, rant over.

Maybe I should try to read the rest of it tomorrow.

gloopy

True. Unless...

"The Company will be excused from compliance with the provisions of this Note in the event a circumstance over which the Company does not have control"

And then the Company gets to keep all those awesome shiny new scope jets forever and ever no matter what happens to the mainline.

80ktsClamp

I need chapter and verse for that... what pages and lines?

I haven't been able to find that which applies in the way you're talking about.

1234

You mean like "Gee, we tried to get out of all those 50 seat leases but we just can't. They wont let us and we don't have any control." Meanwhile, we DCI has taken delivery of all those new 76 seaters and we are busy parking old MD88's due to the new 717/A319.

1234

Page 1-7 first three lines

newKnow

Sailing,

While I appreciate the fact that you are against this TA, I have to take this opportunity to point out that, so far, you have been correct about just about everything. But, in my book, there is a big difference between being correct about something and being right.

This post is yet another example of where while you might be proven to be correct when "another piece to this TA puzzle [is] announced before the vote," but if you are, something is very wrong here.

If you know that "something will be announced before the vote" now, why do you know this? If you are Delta management, then I understand your position. It's your job to play us for all you can. Good on you.

But, if you are a Delta pilot (union rep or not), you don't have any business being in the position where you know how the company will alter our voting process with future announcements. The totality of your posts don't pass the sniff test. What's going on?

Seriously, please explain.

80ktsClamp

Welp, there goes the saving grace of this section.

I'm trying to find something good in this... but run into dead ends at each turn. Perhaps there is some better clarification of what is out of the company control? My stinking suspicion is it is exactly what we think it means and if they can't get out of the air service agreements then they are excused.

So disappointing.


FYI, if you want to get the recall ball rolling, it needs to get on the agenda as soon as possible. Methinks there are some significant recalls in order for this thing.

forgot to bid

2013



2015

Flamer

It goes without saying that the contract brief from ALPA will be incredibly biased and not worth my time to read. Any of you smart guys on here willing to put together a factual analysis of this so I can be educated?

Although if the scope section really has the disclaimer at the bottom that they do not really have to comply, then I guess it doesn't matter anyway.... That will provide me everything I need to vote.

Pineapple Guy

I've stuck (more or less) to my New Year's resolution to stay off this board, as it was sucking the life out of me. And I don't really intend to change that, but I couldn't help but notice the incredible hypocrisy and double talk coming from many on here. Consider the following:

1. Guys like Carl complained at the time of the merger, that even though hourly rates went up, his pay went down because of the low reserve guarantee. Now that's been fixed, and guys are whining. For a guy currently on reserve and getting 70 hours of pay, moving the guarantee to 80 (assuming an 82 ALV), coupled with the contractual pay raises results in a 29% increase in W2 on 1/1/13! Not too shabby.

2. ALPA used to say DCI wasn't a big factor because they were only 15% of total ASMs. Guys on this board lambasted that and said its all about block hours; ASMs are irrelevant. Now, ALPA substantially increases the block hour ratio, grounding several hundred DCI jets, and guys say that doesn't matter; it's all about size. So which is it?

3. Guys wanted SWA pay on day 1. This contract achieves that, when factoring in the differential DC contributions.

4. Guys hated profit sharing when we traded pay to get it. They said it will never pay off, it's subject to bean counter manipulation, etc. They said SHOW ME THE MONEY. Now, ALPA negotiates a "modest" decrease in profit sharing, while still maintaining the top bracket (20% of all income above $2.5B goes to the employees -- think if AAPL had that!), and you're complaining.

5. Lastly, and most importantly, if you want to know why our "team" of professional airline pilots are not winning this game, look at your teammates. Every time Delta ALPA comes up to bat, we hit a single. Not sexy, the crowd doesn't go wild, but we hit a single and get on base. Next comes APA -- swing for the fences, but strke out. Then comes USAir -- swinging for that fence again, strikeout. Sadly, our brothers at UCAL appear to be doing the same thing. Even SWAPA. Because all of us took 4 giant steps backward, they ended up at the front of the line. They work for a company making record profits year in and year out, and now they are finally out front with a chance to LEAD the profession, and what do they do? Do they eliminate the need to buy your job with a type rating paid for by yourself? NO. Do they take an aggressive stance against management and get solid pay raises? NO. They aren't even close to what we negotiated back in 2001 for pay, yet they've had 38 years of unparalleled profitability. Talk about "we'll get 'em next time!" No, they have put themselves in neutral, waiting for us to pass them by, so they can get their cost advantage again, and use that to grow their airline.

So, while I am not at all happy with where the payrates ended up in this TA, when I look around at my fellow aviators, all I can say is, time to step up and help out. We can't do it alone.