Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
11-16-2013, 07:25 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
What the heck happened on here today? I went to bed after Carl (incorrectly) asserted that the shrink asks us about unions and striking... and kaboom, that all went downhill quick.
Whole lot fewer cheerleaders than there should have been is the apparent result...
Whole lot fewer cheerleaders than there should have been is the apparent result...
11-16-2013, 07:48 PM
Weekend and Holiday Pilot
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Sippin' at the Troubadour
Posts: 1,142
11-16-2013, 07:53 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.
Posts: 1,410
[QUOTE=80ktsClamp;1521593]What the heck happened on here today? I went to bed
That was your first mistake.
That was your first mistake.
11-16-2013, 08:13 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
11-16-2013, 08:14 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 770
Delta pilots have been accommodating in the past. But it's like when you're dating a supermodel - sometimes the right answer is 'yes'.
11-16-2013, 08:26 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
My buds don't have dementia. They have no reason to lie about it.
You clearly don't want to hear it, but they did something interesting in that screening process to produce so many folks like you and tsquare that would never strike the airline for any reason. Tsquare says even the thought of it is stupid. My understanding is that before agency shop, Delta pilots had the highest percentage of non-members than any other ALPA airline.
This isn't just statistical abstracts, this is really important. Without the credible threat of a strike, you are essentially a non-union employee. You'll get whatever the company thinks is right...just like all the other Delta employees.
Carl
You clearly don't want to hear it, but they did something interesting in that screening process to produce so many folks like you and tsquare that would never strike the airline for any reason. Tsquare says even the thought of it is stupid. My understanding is that before agency shop, Delta pilots had the highest percentage of non-members than any other ALPA airline.
This isn't just statistical abstracts, this is really important. Without the credible threat of a strike, you are essentially a non-union employee. You'll get whatever the company thinks is right...just like all the other Delta employees.
Carl
We have always had a 10% to 15% group that hated DALPA for real and imagined reasons and back before agency shop most of them were just cheap and they used their "reasons" as justification. Funny how the membership number changed after agency shop.
11-16-2013, 09:42 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Permanently scarred
Posts: 1,707
BB, thanks for your reply. Allow me to address some of your points.
I think I understand the process for making contract gains from the explanations DALPA described in their updates leading to our last round of PWA negotiations. What leads you to come to the conclusion that I have no understanding of "the process?" Are you referring to the "the process" of making small gains to get to the finish line? If so, then that's one philosophy, but I don't believe it to be the one and only philosophy. With that being said, I do believe that's a sound philosophy to make gains. However, I don't think they have to be such small gains. The strategy is sound, just like dollar cost averaging, but both work extremely better if you don't use the smaller figures year over year.
Or did you mean by your statement that I don't understand the process in the macro sense? Well, again, wouldn't you be referring to a philosophy rather than an actual process? And if that was your point then you're making my point for me: a one-dimensional view on how to accomplish your objectives (however undefined they are) is myopic and prevents the opportunity for other operational tactics to be considered for effective use. And to your point that I "have not volunteered" in order to learn "the process" I ask, why? Why can't my union communicate its philosophy without having to use such an argument (cop out)?
By all accounts Delta is doing EXTREMELY WELL. I don't think we can say the same thing about our last TA. Some think it was better than others, but I haven't heard anyone talk about how incredible it was. So, yes, the company does well; we do OK is more accurate. One can point out how they're less than satisfied with certain issues without it being characterized as "attacking' can't they? If taking issue on certain areas of (what should be) disagreement is an attack on an organization and harms us over the long run, well then what would you call the latest recall of our MEC chairman? Did that result in harming us over the long run? There was a lack of harmony to say the least; and dissatisfaction was voiced, and furthermore action was taken. I would say canning a chairman is more of an "attack" than what I suggested. And my previous post's suggestion was simply of the opinion that it wouldn't hurt if our union occasionally showed its membership it isn't a loving puppy dog of its management master to be counted on to always comply and actually let out a little bark. But to the DALPA-can-do-no-wrong crowd that can only mean one thing--a beating of a lifetime. Some see it resulting in a few more table scraps.
If you read my last post carefully you'll see I made no suggestion contrary to this other than the "peaceful partner" bit. ALPA execs and DALPA higher ups may be partners; the line pilot is the hired help. As for what I wrote, I'll save you the time for going to look for it: "The last thing I'm suggesting is that DALPA seek a contentious relationship; I don't pretend to think that would be good for any of us. But the BFF relationship? I guess that's good if you like the status quo."
You're building strawmen here and knocking them down quite impressively. Did I say a thing about wanting to work anywhere else? Or did you infer that for one to desire improved working arrangements means they must think it's better elsewhere? And not that I'm an authority on the issue, but an ardent supporter of DALPA I flew with not long ago pointed out how our pay would match another airline in the passenger business if it were to go out past our current PWA another two years. A claim I'm dubious of.
Not recovered from the merger? What was all that talk about partnerships? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win? But seriously, I'll give credit to ALPA for a doing a good job in those areas, but two points: They "got" you those results because you PAID them to. That's like saying you "got" money from the government after you filed your tax return. Secondly, How do you know the results couldn't have been better without some combativeness?
Yes, they'll work to make things better. They're working hard, and it never stops. I got it. But if you don't set goals then it's pretty easy to not be held to account, isn't it? How about a smidgen of work toward communicating what concerns the majority of the pilots: that DALPA intends to get our pay to where we deserve it to be. Yes, DESERVES to be. The sacrifices made by those who were here before me in terms of paycuts, retirement accounts, and work rules to save the company from never coming back from bankruptcy. So set some goals and let the membership know what those goals are. Dare to be held accountable to those goals. Richard Anderson sets goals. If you don't set goals how does the team know what it's striving for? How does it measure itself? If you don't want to be held accountable you use fuzzy words like "working towards" and "never stop."
Yes, he is very smart. I hear that a lot. I think he's so smart he's figured out how to make DALPA feel they're a partner. And partners have each others' backs, do they not? "We're in this together!" "We're winning!" "Doing great work!" "Isn't this fulfilling?!!!!"
Answer: No speeches, no rah rah Let's destroy DPA! Just clear objectives of what our union intends to do for it's pilot group in terms of pay. If you ruffle some feathers, well, oh my gosh, someone might be a little offended. Guess what--it doesn't mean a labor war has been declared.
The good ol' standby of "if you're not happy with it you should volunteer." So if I voice disgruntlement then the answer is "Your dues aren't enough: you need to give us more of your time." This is akin to a diamond medallion customer voicing displeasure of always getting in late to CLT. "You're tired of the always getting in late to CLT because we have crappy gates and not enough gate crews to get us in on time? Pick up some wands if you want to make a difference."
Very Respectfully,
GG
Or did you mean by your statement that I don't understand the process in the macro sense? Well, again, wouldn't you be referring to a philosophy rather than an actual process? And if that was your point then you're making my point for me: a one-dimensional view on how to accomplish your objectives (however undefined they are) is myopic and prevents the opportunity for other operational tactics to be considered for effective use. And to your point that I "have not volunteered" in order to learn "the process" I ask, why? Why can't my union communicate its philosophy without having to use such an argument (cop out)?
The reality is Delta is our employer. You seem to recognize the mutually beneficial situation we have here; Delta does well, we do well. Delta management sits on the other side of the table, but they are not the enemy unless the situation calls for us to treat them as such. Since we work for Delta, attacking them ends up harming us over the long run.
We maintain situational awareness by looking out the window at the other reference points. Which of those other airlines would you prefer to work for, other than Delta, and why? Is the reason you would perfer to work for another carrier based on anything your union has done, or has not done? Or are they in a different business, like cargo. Objectively, I look out the window and Delta is, at least in my mind, the #1 job with the #1 pay in the passenger business.
Yes, my career has stagnated horribly. We merged and I've not yet recovered, but, wasn't that management's call? ALPA got me quite a substantial pay raise, stock and improved my contract. ALPA did it through partnership more than combativeness. As a result, not only is our pay near the top, but our airline is growing and the best competitor I've ever seen in the marketplace.
ALPA will absolutely work to make things better. Their work never stops. As we type they are working on optimizing FAR 117 for us, they are trying to get more flying for us on the Virgin JV and they are helping indviduals with many myriad issues that nobody talks about.
Very Respectfully,
GG
Last edited by GunshipGuy; 11-16-2013 at 09:55 PM.
11-17-2013, 05:17 AM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
BB, thanks for your reply. Allow me to address some of your points.
I think I understand the process for making contract gains from the explanations DALPA described in their updates leading to our last round of PWA negotiations. What leads you to come to the conclusion that I have no understanding of "the process?" Are you referring to the "the process" of making small gains to get to the finish line? If so, then that's one philosophy, but I don't believe it to be the one and only philosophy. With that being said, I do believe that's a sound philosophy to make gains. However, I don't think they have to be such small gains. The strategy is sound, just like dollar cost averaging, but both work extremely better if you don't use the smaller figures year over year.
Or did you mean by your statement that I don't understand the process in the macro sense? Well, again, wouldn't you be referring to a philosophy rather than an actual process? And if that was your point then you're making my point for me: a one-dimensional view on how to accomplish your objectives (however undefined they are) is myopic and prevents the opportunity for other operational tactics to be considered for effective use. And to your point that I "have not volunteered" in order to learn "the process" I ask, why? Why can't my union communicate its philosophy without having to use such an argument (cop out)?
By all accounts Delta is doing EXTREMELY WELL. I don't think we can say the same thing about our last TA. Some think it was better than others, but I haven't heard anyone talk about how incredible it was. So, yes, the company does well; we do OK is more accurate. One can point out how they're less than satisfied with certain issues without it being characterized as "attacking' can't they? If taking issue on certain areas of (what should be) disagreement is an attack on an organization and harms us over the long run, well then what would you call the latest recall of our MEC chairman? Did that result in harming us over the long run? There was a lack of harmony to say the least; and dissatisfaction was voiced, and furthermore action was taken. I would say canning a chairman is more of an "attack" than what I suggested. And my previous post's suggestion was simply of the opinion that it wouldn't hurt if our union occasionally showed its membership it isn't a loving puppy dog of its management master to be counted on to always comply and actually let out a little bark. But to the DALPA-can-do-no-wrong crowd that can only mean one thing--a beating of a lifetime. Some see it resulting in a few more table scraps.
If you read my last post carefully you'll see I made no suggestion contrary to this other than the "peaceful partner" bit. ALPA execs and DALPA higher ups may be partners; the line pilot is the hired help. As for what I wrote, I'll save you the time for going to look for it: "The last thing I'm suggesting is that DALPA seek a contentious relationship; I don't pretend to think that would be good for any of us. But the BFF relationship? I guess that's good if you like the status quo."
You're building strawmen here and knocking them down quite impressively. Did I say a thing about wanting to work anywhere else? Or did you infer that for one to desire improved working arrangements means they must think it's better elsewhere? And not that I'm an authority on the issue, but an ardent supporter of DALPA I flew with not long ago pointed out how our pay would match another airline in the passenger business if it were to go out past our current PWA another two years. A claim I'm dubious of.
Not recovered from the merger? What was all that talk about partnerships? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win? But seriously, I'll give credit to ALPA for a doing a good job in those areas, but two points: They "got" you those results because you PAID them to. That's like saying you "got" money from the government after you filed your tax return. Secondly, How do you know the results couldn't have been better without some combativeness?
Yes, they'll work to make things better. They're working hard, and it never stops. I got it. But if you don't set goals then it's pretty easy to not be held to account, isn't it? How about a smidgen of work toward communicating what concerns the majority of the pilots: that DALPA intends to get our pay to where we deserve it to be. Yes, DESERVES to be. The sacrifices made by those who were here before me in terms of paycuts, retirement accounts, and work rules to save the company from never coming back from bankruptcy. So set some goals and let the membership know what those goals are. Dare to be held accountable to those goals. Richard Anderson sets goals. If you don't set goals how does the team know what it's striving for? How does it measure itself? If you don't want to be held accountable you use fuzzy words like "working towards" and "never stop."
Yes, he is very smart. I hear that a lot. I think he's so smart he's figured out how to make DALPA feel they're a partner. And partners have each others' backs, do they not? "We're in this together!" "We're winning!" "Doing great work!" "Isn't this fulfilling?!!!!"
Answer: No speeches, no rah rah Let's destroy DPA! Just clear objectives of what our union intends to do for it's pilot group in terms of pay. If you ruffle some feathers, well, oh my gosh, someone might be a little offended. Guess what--it doesn't mean a labor war has been declared.
The good ol' standby of "if you're not happy with it you should volunteer." So if I voice disgruntlement then the answer is "Your dues aren't enough: you need to give us more of your time." This is akin to a diamond medallion customer voicing displeasure of always getting in late to CLT. "You're tired of the always getting in late to CLT because we have crappy gates and not enough gate crews to get us in on time? Pick up some wands if you want to make a difference."
Very Respectfully,
GG
I think I understand the process for making contract gains from the explanations DALPA described in their updates leading to our last round of PWA negotiations. What leads you to come to the conclusion that I have no understanding of "the process?" Are you referring to the "the process" of making small gains to get to the finish line? If so, then that's one philosophy, but I don't believe it to be the one and only philosophy. With that being said, I do believe that's a sound philosophy to make gains. However, I don't think they have to be such small gains. The strategy is sound, just like dollar cost averaging, but both work extremely better if you don't use the smaller figures year over year.
Or did you mean by your statement that I don't understand the process in the macro sense? Well, again, wouldn't you be referring to a philosophy rather than an actual process? And if that was your point then you're making my point for me: a one-dimensional view on how to accomplish your objectives (however undefined they are) is myopic and prevents the opportunity for other operational tactics to be considered for effective use. And to your point that I "have not volunteered" in order to learn "the process" I ask, why? Why can't my union communicate its philosophy without having to use such an argument (cop out)?
By all accounts Delta is doing EXTREMELY WELL. I don't think we can say the same thing about our last TA. Some think it was better than others, but I haven't heard anyone talk about how incredible it was. So, yes, the company does well; we do OK is more accurate. One can point out how they're less than satisfied with certain issues without it being characterized as "attacking' can't they? If taking issue on certain areas of (what should be) disagreement is an attack on an organization and harms us over the long run, well then what would you call the latest recall of our MEC chairman? Did that result in harming us over the long run? There was a lack of harmony to say the least; and dissatisfaction was voiced, and furthermore action was taken. I would say canning a chairman is more of an "attack" than what I suggested. And my previous post's suggestion was simply of the opinion that it wouldn't hurt if our union occasionally showed its membership it isn't a loving puppy dog of its management master to be counted on to always comply and actually let out a little bark. But to the DALPA-can-do-no-wrong crowd that can only mean one thing--a beating of a lifetime. Some see it resulting in a few more table scraps.
If you read my last post carefully you'll see I made no suggestion contrary to this other than the "peaceful partner" bit. ALPA execs and DALPA higher ups may be partners; the line pilot is the hired help. As for what I wrote, I'll save you the time for going to look for it: "The last thing I'm suggesting is that DALPA seek a contentious relationship; I don't pretend to think that would be good for any of us. But the BFF relationship? I guess that's good if you like the status quo."
You're building strawmen here and knocking them down quite impressively. Did I say a thing about wanting to work anywhere else? Or did you infer that for one to desire improved working arrangements means they must think it's better elsewhere? And not that I'm an authority on the issue, but an ardent supporter of DALPA I flew with not long ago pointed out how our pay would match another airline in the passenger business if it were to go out past our current PWA another two years. A claim I'm dubious of.
Not recovered from the merger? What was all that talk about partnerships? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win? But seriously, I'll give credit to ALPA for a doing a good job in those areas, but two points: They "got" you those results because you PAID them to. That's like saying you "got" money from the government after you filed your tax return. Secondly, How do you know the results couldn't have been better without some combativeness?
Yes, they'll work to make things better. They're working hard, and it never stops. I got it. But if you don't set goals then it's pretty easy to not be held to account, isn't it? How about a smidgen of work toward communicating what concerns the majority of the pilots: that DALPA intends to get our pay to where we deserve it to be. Yes, DESERVES to be. The sacrifices made by those who were here before me in terms of paycuts, retirement accounts, and work rules to save the company from never coming back from bankruptcy. So set some goals and let the membership know what those goals are. Dare to be held accountable to those goals. Richard Anderson sets goals. If you don't set goals how does the team know what it's striving for? How does it measure itself? If you don't want to be held accountable you use fuzzy words like "working towards" and "never stop."
Yes, he is very smart. I hear that a lot. I think he's so smart he's figured out how to make DALPA feel they're a partner. And partners have each others' backs, do they not? "We're in this together!" "We're winning!" "Doing great work!" "Isn't this fulfilling?!!!!"
Answer: No speeches, no rah rah Let's destroy DPA! Just clear objectives of what our union intends to do for it's pilot group in terms of pay. If you ruffle some feathers, well, oh my gosh, someone might be a little offended. Guess what--it doesn't mean a labor war has been declared.
The good ol' standby of "if you're not happy with it you should volunteer." So if I voice disgruntlement then the answer is "Your dues aren't enough: you need to give us more of your time." This is akin to a diamond medallion customer voicing displeasure of always getting in late to CLT. "You're tired of the always getting in late to CLT because we have crappy gates and not enough gate crews to get us in on time? Pick up some wands if you want to make a difference."
Very Respectfully,
GG
Thanks for taking the time to write that!
11-17-2013, 05:31 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
GG,
Thank you for your positive tone. Please pardon my brief response but this hotel is connected to the internet via either dial up, or carrier pidgeon, can't figure out which. It is slow.
I did not read a percentage in your post. If you stated, in objective terms, what you wanted, I missed it. Probably you did just as I would do ... you refrained from putting a number out there; knowing a bunch of opinions would be forthcoming on why that number was too high, too low, etc...
Your response seems to be "more" and do so with "forcoso" or "fortississimo." ! If so, I think we (as a pilot group) are doing that.
These negotiations are always complex and Contract 2015 isn't going to be any easier. Trend analysis suggests our nation's very tepid economic recovery (fueled with enormous deficits) probably has another three and a half years in it. So we are going to be in a good position to negotiate, but not as good a position if we reach an impasse and stagnate.
I will invite one of those men who have been involved in our negotiations to chime in under the process of the NMB. Perhaps they can add a perspective to this discussion.
As for my suggestion to volunteer; the point is so you can get inside and see how the sausage is made. When one does a little of the work they can better appreciate the task. And while ALPA will perform coious polling to learn your opinion ... if you're volunteering you have a better opportunity to advance the way you want to see things get done. ( I lobby my Reps as hard as I lobby our Congressmen )
I am sure you have been on a trip that was scheduled so miserably that you've thought "if those damn scheulers had to fly this they would have never created it. They should have to come out and ride our jumpseats through these rotations." ... well ... it is a valid point. Come ride the ALPA jumpseat and see ... I'm sure we will be putting together a Strike Preparedness Committee ... I'm not being a smart alec ... join in.
Thank you for your positive tone. Please pardon my brief response but this hotel is connected to the internet via either dial up, or carrier pidgeon, can't figure out which. It is slow.
I did not read a percentage in your post. If you stated, in objective terms, what you wanted, I missed it. Probably you did just as I would do ... you refrained from putting a number out there; knowing a bunch of opinions would be forthcoming on why that number was too high, too low, etc...
Your response seems to be "more" and do so with "forcoso" or "fortississimo." ! If so, I think we (as a pilot group) are doing that.
These negotiations are always complex and Contract 2015 isn't going to be any easier. Trend analysis suggests our nation's very tepid economic recovery (fueled with enormous deficits) probably has another three and a half years in it. So we are going to be in a good position to negotiate, but not as good a position if we reach an impasse and stagnate.
I will invite one of those men who have been involved in our negotiations to chime in under the process of the NMB. Perhaps they can add a perspective to this discussion.
As for my suggestion to volunteer; the point is so you can get inside and see how the sausage is made. When one does a little of the work they can better appreciate the task. And while ALPA will perform coious polling to learn your opinion ... if you're volunteering you have a better opportunity to advance the way you want to see things get done. ( I lobby my Reps as hard as I lobby our Congressmen )
I am sure you have been on a trip that was scheduled so miserably that you've thought "if those damn scheulers had to fly this they would have never created it. They should have to come out and ride our jumpseats through these rotations." ... well ... it is a valid point. Come ride the ALPA jumpseat and see ... I'm sure we will be putting together a Strike Preparedness Committee ... I'm not being a smart alec ... join in.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 11-17-2013 at 05:52 AM.
11-17-2013, 05:50 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Same invitation to you, what is your Contract 2015 proposal?
... and please publish your opener, counter proposals, and what you'll settle for ... or are all of these the exact same number?
For argument's sake, I'll publish mine .... "My Negotiating Committee speaks for me, I have given them my authorization to call a strike understanding that this is in effect handing them my resignation to use as they see fit if management is unwilling to reach a deal."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
