JungleBus

*scratches head* CPZ or XJ/9E? I've seen a few of our guys look a bit slovenly - and I'll admit, I occasionally skip ironing my shirt for 4am shows in Minot - but haven't seen anyone with wild, outlandish grooming or attire. I've seen it from some other regional guys (including DCI), but not CPZ or XJ - so far.

Mesabah

The only way would be to somehow backdoor it by Skywest acquiring a stake in Chautauqua and flying the planes there, but that's a bit of stretch.

Bucking Bar

As long as we are willing to trade in scope, management does whatever it wants. Creating "bargaining leverage" for the preferred group of union members.

My bigger concern at the moment is our production balance deficit in the AF JV. Widebody scope failures have a much greater impact than medium narrowbody scope failures. Those are our jobs. I dont know why we would fight an arbitrary pay cut, but can not even write a letter protesting the deficit in our widebody flying..ve

sailingfun

As I posted before the union is very aware of the deficit. There is however a lot of rumors that have been posted here and on other forums that are wrong about how the deficit occurred.
Adding Alitalia to the JV via the AF bailout would have put the company out of compliance with the EASK metric. the additional Alitalia flights dropped the EASK metric into the 46 to 47 percent range. We signed a LOA to allow the Alitalia bailout (lots of political aspects involved in this) which allowed that lower EASK however gave the company 3 years with a 1 year fix period to come back into compliance with the original EASK. Essentially we said yes you can have Alitalia but you must grow our operation in the next 3 years to offset their flights. The company agreed because they planned more expansion in Europe. That goes against the forum wisdom that the pulldown in Europe is about the JV's and not the economy.
As everyone knows we did not expand in Europe with the economic collapse. Our EASK portion of the flying has remained essentially the same meaning AF/KLM have also pulled back at about the same rate. The company however did not add the additional flying percentage wise required and it appears they do not intend to do so and will be out of compliance at the end of the 36 month measuring period.
It is anticipated that this will be incorporated in the talks concerning the VA joint venture. Talk to your reps if you have thoughts on what we should ask for because of the non compliance.

Denny Crane

I'm concerned about the production balance deficit also. We all should be. We should also be watching the other end of our scope. It will be "interesting" to say the least to see what is/is not negotiated in both cases.

Denny

80ktsClamp

I deleted some posts on here due to a quote from one of our soon to be former union leads using a gunship friendly fire incident resulting in a soldiers death to poke fun at a user. How incredibly disrespectful.

APCLurker

Thank you for doing that. That comment was absolutely pathetic on slowplays part. Truly a new low.

Thank you for providing the background on that one GF. My apologies that someone would bring that up in the way it was.

Bucking Bar

Sailing,

Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.

We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.

What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.

We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.

Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.

Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.

Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?

We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.

APCLurker

A-frikken-men.

There should be no "Compensation" other than an end to what they are doing in violation. No trading "compensation" for the further loss of any Delta pilot jobs due to said violation.

It would be nice to be on the growth end of some these jv's/code shares/49% equity/etc..

Denny Crane

Can someone explain to me how we are paid for qualification training, not CQ but "new airplane school." Thanks,

Denny

Oh, and what does "PTP" mean on your schedule and do you get paid for it?