Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
12-15-2010, 04:47 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Still in one
Posts: 784
You have a right to be concerned about scope and it will be a hot topic for sure amongst the MEC. I just think the pendulum is naturally swinging the other way now because the industry has changed. I have said before that labor negotiations can't ignore the economics of the industry and the company, but Delta is in pretty good shape right now and getting better. I am hopeful for your future.
I have heard the discussion that why expend any negotiating capitol on something we already have - except we only have it because of the referenced economic pendulum, which by it's nature will swing again. Like selling stocks at the right time, it's about locking in gains, not just saying my portfolio is worth X today........
12-15-2010, 05:14 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
I have heard the discussion that why expend any negotiating capitol on something we already have - except we only have it because of the referenced economic pendulum, which by it's nature will swing again. Like selling stocks at the right time, it's about locking in gains, not just saying my portfolio is worth X today........
Depends on if you see "unity" as negotiating capital.
All Delta flying done by Delta pilots = unity. As a union, that should be our default position. We should desire to represent all of Delta's pilot labor. It should be a political and ethical statement in addition to a litmus test for our actions in union governance.
It should also be our table position. ... If management comes to the table with 130 seats and we come to the table with status quo, the natural inclination of mediators is going to be a split up the middle, favoring management. If we come to the table with zero seats and concede to status quo after a lot of tears shed about the members getting abandoned under enemy fire, we'll end up in a position which is closer to our idea. ... and let us not forget status quo on section 1 was a whole series of concessions! We've still got a bankruptcy Section 1.
I don't pretend Continental and United are serious about a position which would cut off their feed and kill their company. What they need is a reexamination and rationalization of their scope sections. They are trying to do this via their JPWA negotiations. I say good on 'em.
12-15-2010, 05:40 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Flying the SEC
Posts: 2,350
(not contradicting your post, in fact I like the idea of closing the barn door when a cow wonders in)
Depends on if you see "unity" as negotiating capital.
All Delta flying done by Delta pilots = unity. As a union, that should be our default position. We should desire to represent all of Delta's pilot labor. It should be a political and ethical statement in addition to a litmus test for our actions in union governance.
It should also be our table position. ... If management comes to the table with 130 seats and we come to the table with status quo, the natural inclination of mediators is going to be a split up the middle, favoring management. If we come to the table with zero seats and concede to status quo after a lot of tears shed about the members getting abandoned under enemy fire, we'll end up in a position which is closer to our idea. ... and let us not forget status quo on section 1 was a whole series of concessions! We've still got a bankruptcy Section 1.
I don't pretend Continental and United are serious about a position which would cut off their feed and kill their company. What they need is a reexamination and rationalization of their scope sections. They are trying to do this via their JPWA negotiations. I say good on 'em.
Depends on if you see "unity" as negotiating capital.
All Delta flying done by Delta pilots = unity. As a union, that should be our default position. We should desire to represent all of Delta's pilot labor. It should be a political and ethical statement in addition to a litmus test for our actions in union governance.
It should also be our table position. ... If management comes to the table with 130 seats and we come to the table with status quo, the natural inclination of mediators is going to be a split up the middle, favoring management. If we come to the table with zero seats and concede to status quo after a lot of tears shed about the members getting abandoned under enemy fire, we'll end up in a position which is closer to our idea. ... and let us not forget status quo on section 1 was a whole series of concessions! We've still got a bankruptcy Section 1.
I don't pretend Continental and United are serious about a position which would cut off their feed and kill their company. What they need is a reexamination and rationalization of their scope sections. They are trying to do this via their JPWA negotiations. I say good on 'em.
12-15-2010, 06:25 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Got news for ya.. you are on an anonymous web board. All you write here is opinion and conjecture. Nothing more. You have no more "real" credibility than anyone else.. unless of course you come out and tell us who you really are.. then... maybe....
12-15-2010, 06:29 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
12-15-2010, 07:15 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Decoupled
Posts: 922
12-15-2010, 07:24 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Acl,
I understand what you are saying. The company needs money for airplanes in the future. All I am saying is that I gave already.
1.) Take a 45% paycut to help the company buy airplanes for someone else: Done. Box checked.
2.) Allow someone else to fly above mentioned aircraft while you watch your fleet and flying shrink. Done. Box checked again.
My giving spirit is exhausted. Bah humbug. I want Santa to re-fill my stocking with pay and scope.
New K AKA Ebenezer Scrooge
I understand what you are saying. The company needs money for airplanes in the future. All I am saying is that I gave already.
1.) Take a 45% paycut to help the company buy airplanes for someone else: Done. Box checked.
2.) Allow someone else to fly above mentioned aircraft while you watch your fleet and flying shrink. Done. Box checked again.
My giving spirit is exhausted. Bah humbug. I want Santa to re-fill my stocking with pay and scope.
New K AKA Ebenezer Scrooge
Like I have always said, I do not care how you do your books, or who "owns" the jet, but there will be a DAL seniority listed butt in the seat.
12-15-2010, 07:54 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Investors conference this morning 170-180 mil into IT next year
12-15-2010, 08:10 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Agree 100%. Just trying to expand some of what Bar was saying. They have done this before and they will do it again. Getting debt off the balance sheet and re-categorizing it as a cash flow expense has been a pattern we have seen before It makes the company look better than it is.
Like I have always said, I do not care how you do your books, or who "owns" the jet, but there will be a DAL seniority listed butt in the seat.
Like I have always said, I do not care how you do your books, or who "owns" the jet, but there will be a DAL seniority listed butt in the seat.
12-15-2010, 08:12 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Does anyone know how many short call days you are required to sit in a month you have CQ?
Is it the same as always, six? Or, does it get prorated, like when you have vacation?
Is it the same as always, six? Or, does it get prorated, like when you have vacation?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
