Originally Posted by Timbo

Here's something I've been thinking about ever since the "Early Contract, Golden Opportunity", you know, the one where Richard traded us 4833 with upcoming record profits, in exchange for the 717's and parking the 50 seat RJ's, ie. all of which was going to happen regardless...

What If...

Richard is going to now trade DALPA the much fabled Wide Body Order, for JVTA and NRT Slot relief?

It'll sound something like this:

Hey guys, Richard says we can't make money flying X, Y and Z...but if we give him Scope Relief (again) he will order 12 more A330's, to fly A, B and C!!

Hoo Ray! It's Win Win! Again!

Seems to me that Richard has never wasted an opportunity to trade the corporate long term plans to DALPA, in exchange for more scope relief.

I mean heck, if they are going to do it anyway, why not tell DALPA the whole deal rests ON THEM capitulating...something, right?

What's the worst that could happen?

Has DALPA ever said NO to...anything Richard threw at them?

So, I expect we will give all the JVTA and NRT slot relief necessary, and as soon as we do, Richard will announce the Wide Body Order.... Just don't be surprised when you find out this big Wide Body Order is really 767ER replacement jets, something they were going to have to do anyway.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

I think there needs to be one more thing added to your scenario above. DALPA will claim our language was so weak that the legal experts at ALPA said we had almost no chance of winning the grievance. So at least we got the wide body order in exchange PLUS new iron clad language to prevent this from ever happening again.

Fast forward to DALPA's response when new wide bodies replace existing ones: "Stop being so negative about everything". And DALPA's response to the next violation and iron clad language portrayed as indefensible: Shut up you Carl-loving ALPA-hater.

Carl

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Now I'm with you. I knew I was missing your main point.

Unfortunately, the way I read our JV language, I don't think we have a strong case for receiving any compensatory damages for flying lost prior to the measurement date of March 2014. The arbitrator would likely only give us a fix going forward.

I do think there is a case to be made for it but when a company cries "economics," I think judges/arbitrators are loathe to give compensatory damages. But in this case, with the company making boatloads of money, I would definitely want the Union to vigorously pursue some kind of compensation for lost flying. Whether it is awarded is beside the point.

This totally depends on how ALPA allows DALPA to fight this grievance. Any and all funds/legal assets would come from ALPA national. One choice of ALPA's would be to negotiate it away directly with management without any DALPA input.

This would absolutely pave the way for DPA. Even I would send in a card then! I really don't see Alpa national doing anything about our scope without Dalpa. I know you will say "but what about Pinnacle?" Yes, we should have been in the room for that negotiation but it probably would have been just as observers anyway. I think this would be totally different in that it has to do with the MAJOR section of our contract.

Another would be for DALPA to purposely put forth an extremely weak case and try to lose in exchange for a strategic promise from management. Yet another possibility is for DALPA to claim our language is too weak to even grieve (like the RAH scope abuse).

Highly unlikely but possible. I would think EVERYONE knows "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" so to speak. This also ties in with my response above.

In order to win this, we would need a strong response from ALPA national showing anger at the number of jobs lost by Delta pilots and commit the full legal resources of national to defend the language and accept nothing other than full compliance immediately. It will also require DALPA forcing management to do something they absolutely don't want to do. What do you think our chances are of getting these responses from ALPA/DALPA?

Well, if my current reps are any indication, I would say pretty good. But we are talking a year and 9 months down the road with the 3 year measurement period ending 3/31/14 and then a year to get back in compliance 3/31/15. (Eerily close to our next contract openers, I'd say within 5 to 10 days.)

Carl

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

Thank you, both Denny and Carl. All good points.

Originally Posted by LandGreen2

anybody been through the 73N CQ lately? i heard it was a little different than years past...?? Thx!

Originally Posted by Timbo

I mean heck, if they are going to do it anyway, why not tell DALPA the whole deal rests ON THEM capitulating...something, right?.....

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

All I can say is this issue is going to be a slippery slope for DALPA and the Company to resolve....

Denny

Originally Posted by SierraWhiskey

Has anyone had the experience of having to do Jury duty? If so, could you enlighten me with your experience and how the company handles pay, daily procedures etc...?Thanks in advance.

Originally Posted by georgetg

Now that's an understatement!

The saddest part is the company was given "wiggle" room.
+/- 1.5% from the target of 50% and thats on a rolling 3-year average.

Then in addition, they were given 1.P.4. Note two, essentially a one time "get out of jail" card.
All the company had to do is meet 49.75% for a 12-moth period and all previous "underages" would be wiped clean.

Even with this extra bit of flexibility Delta still will fail to meet the target on March 30, 2014.
Multiple opportunities gave the company lots of flexibility to execute the business plan.

The PWA gave Delta enough flexibility that the company could have ceased flying any Transatlantic JV flying for two years, then brought our percentage to 49.75% for the current 12-month period ending March 30th, 2014 and Delta would have been deemed in compliance.

All of this won't matter and I'll be happy as a clam if we actually make the new JV language 1.E.8, just added in the last contract, stick when it comes to the Virgin JV:
the Company’s share block hours flown under the JV will be at least 75% of the Company’s share of revenue in that twelve-month period.
Since Delta owns half of Virgin, Delta's share of the revenue of the Virgin/DAL JV is 75%. If we really get to fly 75% of Delta's portion of the Revenue as is stipulated in PWA 1.E.8, we would get a 56% share of all Virgin/DAL JV flying. That would be a lot of flying added. If we really see a 56% share of flying for Delta pilots in the Virgin/DAL JV, this thread will be a very happy place.

Cheers
George