Originally Posted by FIIGMO

I am not sure where dues come into play. My point is really that DALPA can only go back and negotiate again. Demanding is not going to do it IMO. The company will not give in unless they get something in return. Zero would be turning this TA down and going back, you would still be paying dues. This TA and its time frame is a positive in tough economic times. I am willing to move forward and capitalize on further opportunities.

Originally Posted by Elvis90

I've put Sailor on my ignore list...I tried to engage him in a thoughtful discussion and I like hearing differing opinions, but he resorted to condescension & general rudeness. I'm sure his heart is broken.

Originally Posted by texavia

Then why bother? Better off with my union dues staying in my pocket, instead of paying admission to a zero sum game.

Originally Posted by Elvis90

I plan to do my part.

Originally Posted by FIIGMO

I am curious what will make the company agree to that? I feel that 76 seat aircraft are not recoverable. No matter how much table pounding is going to get it back at this time. I do feel however, as the industry evolves and the pilot shortage becomes real, there will be an opportunity to further contain scope of the likes in this TA and bring more of the DCI flying to mainline and we could see 76 seats back at mainline. Today, DAL has no incentive to do so and to think we can just send it back to demand something else has its own perils.

We will pay for any improvements in another TA, we may get 5% more but we will give it up somewhere else. It is a negotiation. If we want to demand and hold our breath, the company has more options time and money to do what they will. The is a small win (i wish it were more), in 2 1/2 years we may be getting nothing or a bigger win, but we will be much better off with this TA than without.

I also see that if DAL wants to merge or assume assets from say (AMR) on JULY 2,2012, they will need our cooperation and they will indeed be looking to provide incentives for our cooperation. That would mean this TA was just improved that much more. Heck every time a side letter needs to be signed fine. Just give me 1 or 2% pay increase.

Originally Posted by johnso29

I too am curious. I think a sunset clause is more likely then recapturing the 76 seaters. I feel the concept of our Sec 1 in the TA is a step in the right direction. There are concerns with it too, mainly with the language. We were able to hold the line at 76 seats, but at the price of more 76 seat hulls. So what's the price next time?

Originally Posted by Ferd149

Hey mods, why can't I go back about 12 hours and edit a post. Is something broke or did they turn it off? I need to add something.

Originally Posted by johnso29

Ferd,

I think the EDIT option is available for a limited period of time. You can quote yourself and edit that.