Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-13-2011, 04:48 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Bingo. We need to deal with this or we will be in real trouble within five years. Part of the problem is all of these agents are over worked. I would put two at each gate. It always impresses me how smoothly the operations overseas run. Two to three agents at the gate, and all issues are dealt with quickly and with respect.
We need to offend those who refuse to participate and we need those who are trying to be given the assets they need. These people are fighting WWIII with muskets, they deserve better.
One of the things I noticed between Delta and Continental for years now is the attitude towards the non-pilot group to the pilots. Pilots are respected here, not at CAL. You may think I'm crazy but trust me, I've seen very bad stuff in the CAL system. To me the Delta pilots have put their feet down on a lot of matters and you could see it, which is great. The idea that this is our airline for the long haul and we must protect it is a great idea.
Now the pilot who thinks the enlisted class should snap to and salute and read his mind, different story.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 07-13-2011 at 05:08 AM.
07-13-2011, 05:03 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
One other thing. LM isn't here anymore, you'll have to find another bogeyman. If you're really interested in TO's vision and not just political hackery, you can read the last 7 months of communications. You might concentrate on his Chairman's letters as a start.
Just a suggestion.
Just a suggestion.
TO can state this in a two paragraph letter. "Pilots, we hear you, we see you, and we will fight for what you want. We have heard loud and clear that scope is not for sale, that you want not just a great job, but a great career, and your goal of restoring that career is job one for this MEC."
One run-on sentence like that and DPA dies, the pilot become unified, and our leverage goes through the roof. As I further stated to my LEC Char, legally worded letters are just irritating pilots to no end. The want leaders who will carry their water. You may argue that you currently see and do this, but when the pilots do not believe it, the communication is failing somewhere.
Call DPA whatever you want, but they have 25% of the pilots here sending in cards. If I were a rep or working for the Admin, that would get my attention. There are plenty of guys like Bar out there that are just as frustrated at what they see, but will not support a new union. I would venture to guess that it is at least another 30-40% of this group. In the last four months I have only flown with one pilot who thought that ALPA (DALPA) completely and totally had their back. I fly with a lot of the "silent majority" that we often hear about, and frankly, they are more upset than the web board malcontent. I mean that. I have been just floored at what they want to see as a min. in this Section 6. I hope they have the gumption to put it in the survey.
The point to my post is, even with all of the communication, contract comparisons, etc, guys are feeling that they are being managed, and they are over it. They want their union to state what I have said above. Do this, and I cannot see one more card going to DPA. This Admin needs to take the position that all of the reps ran on. It is not a stretch, and by not doing this, this last year, all of that communication has effectively done nothing.
This is what I hear and see every day with everyone I fly with. From 1983 hires to 2007 hires. The only one that was content was a 1985 hire. I get an ear full when the realize that I actually talk to the Reps.
Last edited by acl65pilot; 07-13-2011 at 05:21 AM.
07-13-2011, 05:04 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I agree. I do not see the decision, which was decision on "labor" as the lynchpin, I see the "findings" that the NMB used to arrive at that decision as key. I know you and I have discussed this, and we agree.
I am not a rep, and frankly I have not talked at length with my reps as to why, but my deduction is that the contract was written a certain way, and legally speaking they are in compliance. It may have not been the intent, but it is the result. Just because we thought that it would help below 76 seat economics does not mean that an operator like RJET cannot use the wording to their advantage. They can and are.
What is needed to "fix" this is a contractual change. It would not stop RJET as that would be very costly, but it would stop future scenarios of this nature. It also is important to fix because of these metal neutral JV's that are the half step away from a holding company or Transnational that will be across many countries laws and jurisdictions.
I did not believe it would be dropped, but that a contractual, legal, or legislative change would be needed. Frankly, with the election season rolling around, these candidates need money, and big business is their cash cow. This will not see a resolution to our liking until after the election. Your only hope is the DOJ/DOT and I am not holding my breath for them.
My guess is, nothing will change unless we buy the change at the table. It will be a significant cost, because it is important for issues far bigger than F9/RJET.
I am not a rep, and frankly I have not talked at length with my reps as to why, but my deduction is that the contract was written a certain way, and legally speaking they are in compliance. It may have not been the intent, but it is the result. Just because we thought that it would help below 76 seat economics does not mean that an operator like RJET cannot use the wording to their advantage. They can and are.
What is needed to "fix" this is a contractual change. It would not stop RJET as that would be very costly, but it would stop future scenarios of this nature. It also is important to fix because of these metal neutral JV's that are the half step away from a holding company or Transnational that will be across many countries laws and jurisdictions.
I did not believe it would be dropped, but that a contractual, legal, or legislative change would be needed. Frankly, with the election season rolling around, these candidates need money, and big business is their cash cow. This will not see a resolution to our liking until after the election. Your only hope is the DOJ/DOT and I am not holding my breath for them.
My guess is, nothing will change unless we buy the change at the table. It will be a significant cost, because it is important for issues far bigger than F9/RJET.
I thought it was brilliant, go after the legal definition of air carrier which if changed means RAH is in immediate violation of Section 1.
Far cheaper than pursuing a NMB case against against RAH and then Skywest then the next guy and so on. But doing this would inflict incredible damage to RAH's finances, and the IBT knew that when they pursued their STS case. And so they made it so very specific knowing or hoping that APA/ALPA would not have the resources or drive to pursue another case against the NMB no matter how much the NMB baits us.
But inflicting incredible damage to RAH's money train I fear would be frowned upon in Herndon where the mission is different than ours not to mention they own the lawyers we'd require for this effort.
So why do I feel as if nothing will ever be said about this again? The can won't be kicked down the road, it's going to be kicked to the ditch.
And I seriously doubt we could offer to fly for free and get that kind of change in C2012. So ironically we can't convince anyone to stop funding our competition because the DCI whipsaw trumps all, which is probably why we'll never be on par with SWA.
07-13-2011, 05:06 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
We have nice people by and large at gates. Although one closed the door a few weeks ago 10 early and left 12 open seats and stranded my dad and others for six hours in ATL that had all been waiting at the gate. The attitude has to go. I got yelled at by 4 passengers last night about the attitude of ### agents. I have no idea what happened to them but I was none impressed when the paperwork hadn't been printed on a flight that arrived 4 hours late and at the top of the gate house I watched agents struggle to find a cheat sheet to help them print off the paperwork. ?!? Flight was late again. And these weren't young new agents, they were just refusing to change.
Assets. These people are fighting a WWIII with muskets.
One of the things I noticed between Delta and Continental not only when I got here but back when I commuted out of ATL to EWR for Coex and that was that you could tell agents and operations respected pilots at Delta. Not CAL. The Delta pilots had put their feet down on a lot of matters and you could see it.
Now sure we have pilots that really need to keep their feet to themselves as they're seemingly shocked to find the enlisted class doesn't stand at attention and read their minds, but by and large, the idea that this is our airline for the long haul and we must protect it is a great idea.
Assets. These people are fighting a WWIII with muskets.
One of the things I noticed between Delta and Continental not only when I got here but back when I commuted out of ATL to EWR for Coex and that was that you could tell agents and operations respected pilots at Delta. Not CAL. The Delta pilots had put their feet down on a lot of matters and you could see it.
Now sure we have pilots that really need to keep their feet to themselves as they're seemingly shocked to find the enlisted class doesn't stand at attention and read their minds, but by and large, the idea that this is our airline for the long haul and we must protect it is a great idea.
07-13-2011, 05:15 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Coming in an uncomfortably close second in the ranking, which compiled thousands of separate surveys, is the second-busiest carrier at Port Columbus International Airport: Delta Air Lines Inc.(NYSE
AL), slammed for its tacked-on fees.
^^^^^^^^
Whew, a utility company edged us out for most hated company in America. I'm sure our size helped us beat the other legacies (who were mostly on the list). But somehow SWA, with their complete lack of outsourcing, didn't even show up. Huh.
AL), slammed for its tacked-on fees.^^^^^^^^
Whew, a utility company edged us out for most hated company in America. I'm sure our size helped us beat the other legacies (who were mostly on the list). But somehow SWA, with their complete lack of outsourcing, didn't even show up. Huh.
We could and should do better. And one thing i keep thinking about and it'll probably get me redlighted off the DALS train here, but, we should've rebranded this entire airline during the merger.
Rename it something other than NWA and DAL. The people who loved us knew where we were, the people who hated us are likely the same people that hit the brakes approaching the airport as they try to read the signs and go into mass confusion and they'd probably think we were some new startup venture.
America likes startups. They hate big [name industry].
07-13-2011, 05:21 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
ALPA National, the television show:
07-13-2011, 05:50 AM
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 18
At least you brought me out of lurk mode. To say that the administration isn't using the policy manuel to their benefit in this instance of this NC debacle is disingenuous at best, an an outright lie all likelihood. Here are my predictions:
You will see two guys initials RH and BF run for negotiating committee. You may remember RH as the one storming out of the room when he was NOT elected chairman of a certain committee, sending the minions (defined as guys on ALPA trip drops with no title in the union) scurrying out of the room to develop a hasty contingency plan when the MEC threw them a curve ball. That left RH jobless, and BF is a rep without a council. I find it fascinating that the predominant argument against the donut crowd is "don't upset the balance so close to section 6", yet that is exactly what we are about to do.
Hey, I'm not saying that there aren't politics out there. Everything is politics. Just don't let the likes of slo, alfa, and PG tell you that this isn't.
Wanna hear more? Let's head to the national level. ALPA, the organization founded on safety, will soon have no national safety chairman position, or security chairman, or jumpseat chairman, or training chairman. These positions and responsibilities will soon be assimilated by much more qualified people: the top national officers mostly the 1st vice president. BTW, isn't it interesting that 3 of the top 6 are Delta guys? It would already be done already, except the EC summarily rejected the idea outright, forcing the national chairman to cancel the vote to change the policy manual in order to regroup, AND THEN SOLICIT INPUT FROM VARIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERS. Funny how the input wasn't requested prior to trying the forced push. Expect this to be shoved though in the very near future, if it has not already been done. There have already been some resignations from key national positions who want no part of this. Reason cited for the change: streamlining of the process and cost containment. Real reason: sidestep of key individuals who are experts in the process in order to further agendas. Result: tightening of the power group within ALPA, and less checks and balances.
There is more, oh so much more. The irony: I am not a donut person. I am an ALPA person. I am, however, in the process of reevaluation as the developments at national, trickling down to Delta, disgust me. More resignations coming. Keep watching.
Last edited by LCS25; 07-13-2011 at 06:08 AM. Reason: couple of typos
07-13-2011, 05:51 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
07-13-2011, 05:51 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
What fun it must be booking acts for the Jerry Springer show. While researching DAL stock this morning for reasons justifying the sell off, I ran across this:
This was published along side the we site's for sale analysis of DAL stock. This vacuous twenty something suit proposes if people were dead, they would not require as many benefits. He equates walking away from an under water mortgage to pulling the life support plug on someone else's kids, or parents ... why not?
This kind of buffoonery is why I'm not too keen on mutual funds and hope our company is not watching the stock price too closely.
We have good revenue growth, conservative management and are pulling down trans Atlantic capacity just as the threat of sovereign debt default is increasing.
The shutdown of government spending will serve both short-term needs in balancing the budget but address long-term budget problems we face due to the Nanny State mentality in Washington.Take Medicare, one of the biggest causes of our current budget trouble. If we slash spending dramatically, we will not only eliminate one of the biggest drains on the U.S. Treasury, but we will also fix the nagging demographic problem caused by Baby Boomers living longer and clogging Social Security roles.
Without healthcare, surely few of our seniors will survive into old age. This will dramatically reduce both future Medicare and Social Security payouts.
These socialist programs are part of the problem. It’s time to make them part of the solution.
Without healthcare, surely few of our seniors will survive into old age. This will dramatically reduce both future Medicare and Social Security payouts.
These socialist programs are part of the problem. It’s time to make them part of the solution.
This kind of buffoonery is why I'm not too keen on mutual funds and hope our company is not watching the stock price too closely.
We have good revenue growth, conservative management and are pulling down trans Atlantic capacity just as the threat of sovereign debt default is increasing.
07-13-2011, 05:54 AM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
As you can guess I talk to everyone I fly with about what they want. As I recently told my LEC Chair, it is simple:
TO can state this in a two paragraph letter. "Pilots, we hear you, we see you, and we will fight for what you want. We have heard loud and clear that scope is not for sale, that you want not just a great job, but a great career, and your goal of restoring that career is job one for this MEC."
One run-on sentence like that and DPA dies, the pilot become unified, and our leverage goes through the roof. As I further stated to my LEC Char, legally worded letters are just irritating pilots to no end. The want leaders who will carry their water. You may argue that you currently see and do this, but when the pilots do not believe it, the communication is failing somewhere.
Call DPA whatever you want, but they have 25% of the pilots here sending in cards. If I were a rep or working for the Admin, that would get my attention. There are plenty of guys like Bar out there that are just as frustrated at what they see, but will not support a new union. I would venture to guess that it is at least another 30-40% of this group. In the last four months I have only flown with one pilot who thought that ALPA (DALPA) completely and totally had their back. I fly with a lot of the "silent majority" that we often hear about, and frankly, they are more upset than the web board malcontent. I mean that. I have been just floored at what they want to see as a min. in this Section 6. I hope they have the gumption to put it in the survey.
The point to my post is, even with all of the communication, contract comparisons, etc, guys are feeling that they are being managed, and they are over it. They want their union to state what I have said above. Do this, and I cannot see one more card going to DPA. This Admin needs to take the position that all of the reps ran on. It is not a stretch, and by not doing this, this last year, all of that communication has effectively done nothing.
This is what I hear and see every day with everyone I fly with. From 1983 hires to 2007 hires. The only one that was content was a 1985 hire. I get an ear full when the realize that I actually talk to the Reps.
TO can state this in a two paragraph letter. "Pilots, we hear you, we see you, and we will fight for what you want. We have heard loud and clear that scope is not for sale, that you want not just a great job, but a great career, and your goal of restoring that career is job one for this MEC."
One run-on sentence like that and DPA dies, the pilot become unified, and our leverage goes through the roof. As I further stated to my LEC Char, legally worded letters are just irritating pilots to no end. The want leaders who will carry their water. You may argue that you currently see and do this, but when the pilots do not believe it, the communication is failing somewhere.
Call DPA whatever you want, but they have 25% of the pilots here sending in cards. If I were a rep or working for the Admin, that would get my attention. There are plenty of guys like Bar out there that are just as frustrated at what they see, but will not support a new union. I would venture to guess that it is at least another 30-40% of this group. In the last four months I have only flown with one pilot who thought that ALPA (DALPA) completely and totally had their back. I fly with a lot of the "silent majority" that we often hear about, and frankly, they are more upset than the web board malcontent. I mean that. I have been just floored at what they want to see as a min. in this Section 6. I hope they have the gumption to put it in the survey.
The point to my post is, even with all of the communication, contract comparisons, etc, guys are feeling that they are being managed, and they are over it. They want their union to state what I have said above. Do this, and I cannot see one more card going to DPA. This Admin needs to take the position that all of the reps ran on. It is not a stretch, and by not doing this, this last year, all of that communication has effectively done nothing.
This is what I hear and see every day with everyone I fly with. From 1983 hires to 2007 hires. The only one that was content was a 1985 hire. I get an ear full when the realize that I actually talk to the Reps.
The thing that really troubles me is this: Why would TO not have already done this? What is his objective? What is DALPA's objective?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
