Bucking Bar

Scambo,

Just think it through. What opportunities would be stopped by anything our current contract?

Even merger and acquisition activity hinges around Section 1 (scope).

In every scenario, management knows what it wants to do. So, it knows where to put the traps because it knows where the path leads. Given this truth, it is in management's favor because of management's superior information.

On the other side of the table we have a group with individualistic interests trying to grab the high ground. Frankly it seems a little like the lead up to Gettysburg.

IMHO we are fine under our current agreement. Force management to buy airplanes and operate them here, even if it costs the company some money. Make them play their hand. Bide our time until we have at least passed our strike authorization vote. The closer we get to self help, the more real leverage we have.

tsquare

Yeah I know...

tripled

Heh. I was thinking the same thing. Half a "tune-in" could be subtle enough that only the trained eye would notice. Plus, the current gesture may be mis-construed: not every dude would think of gently lifting underboob. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

orvil

Protect essential

scambo1

Bar;

Since we (DALPA) didn't go after RAH, I don't really see anything in our current contract that stops management from re-fleeting off the reservation and then domestic codesharing.

The only thing we have going for us is control of the parking brake, 2 engine taxi, apu extended run, requesting back of the line for de-icing, more turns in holding followed by a divert, etc. but those would be stopped by injunction.

It is either in good faith or it isn't.

Timbo

Well...if you're going to do the 'cupped hand' you need to be sure to hold your hand up high enough, that it's not construed as 'turn your head and cough...' or you may end up with a new friend you didn't need.

And about that other picture: "Here honey, let me reset those circuit breakers for you."

Pro Fessional

Sincere question? Of course I have. I have been around here for several contracts, and I have learned that any conclusions drawn based on summaries or bullet points provided before a TA is reached are misguided at best and often just plain wrong. The devil is always in the details. There is an awful lot of chest thumping going on around here and not nearly enough information to back it up. My favorite is "Not one more 76-seat jet or I vote NO!" Our scope is full of some really ugly loopholes regarding codeshare and jets below 70 seats. We sell seats on some international airlines most people have never even heard of. Alaska has taken away most of our west coast flying. Our company has pumped $100 million into Gol Airlines. I'm not making any decisions until I see what has IMPROVED in Section 1. Personally I would be willing to consider an increase in the number of 76-seaters within the 255 70+ seat total in exchange for meaningful enforceable restrictions on codeshare and permanent phaseout of ALL RJ's (and turboprops) other than those 255. You notice I said "consider." I don't have enough information to make that decision yet, and neither does anyone else.

forgot to bid

proposal, if section 1 should be stand alone, then let's have two ta's... section 1 first, we'll vote on it, then sections 2-28 and we'll vote on that.

that way nobody is swayed about section 1 because of section 3 or what have you.

Timbo

While you and I might like that, I doubt the Company wants any part of it. Scope and Pay, is their 'trade bait' for the other 27 sections, take that out of the mix and they don't have much to 'bargin' with.

TheManager

Yes. The NNP sucked. Not good and all of us here pretty much agree on that as many have voiced that opinion.

However, there are several ways to look at the NNP. Consider this one, the application of pressure. Just as the company will selectively leak rumors and send up trial ballons to manage our expectations, the same tactics can be used by DALPA.

Releasing a NNP that that will ellicit a known response that will send a message to the "top decison makers" at the table is a good tool. By dissecting the NNP, we basically determine that it is a floating turd that will not flush no matter how hard they try to get us to swallow it. In this section 6, the first real one done in the the accelerated information age we are in, the response to NNP is lightning quick and likely has been received by all parties at the table.

A warning shot of sorts.

I will wait to see the final document with the final language. Not a summary.

I am also sure that within 24 hours after it is out:

1. we will completely discontstruct it, reverse engineer it, and list the good, the bad and the ugly. No need for a con paper really.

2. the spin machine will be at an rpm like we have never seen.

Isn't social media great? It is going to make this one wild and different ride like we haven't seen before. It also makes those parties doing the negotiating nervous. Just as much as the internet, instant information, and social media are a tool to be used, they can cut the other way and damage you as well.

Arab Spring anyone??