johnso29

I get it Nu. I just don't see how some people expect full restoration, plus the company eating millions of dollars in penalties. It just isn't going to happen. There has to be a meet point somewhere in the middle.

Carl Spackler

First of all, welcome to our little neighborhood. Here is the main reason that there can be no "give and take" (compromise) when it comes to Section 1: Unlike ANY other section in our entire contract, Scope is the ONE point that we are unlikely to ever be allowed to strike over (although the case law isn't completely settled but we'd have a huge hill to climb). Because of this problem with the law, once we give a concession on scope, it can NEVER be regained by us through any kind of job action. With all the other sections in our contract, we can fight and strike over them in order to make gains.

With this wrinkle of the law in mind, concessions in scope is like being killed by a python. The python doesn't crush you, it just maintains its grip until you exhale. Each time you exhale, it tightens the grip until you no longer have any room to inhale. Every time we give a scope concession, the company takes it to the limit...thus tightening its grip. We MUST stop giving ANY concessions to scope while we still have a little chest cavity room left to breath. Does that make sense?

And to a great degree, the reason the profession has suffered so greatly is that so many major airline jobs have been outsourced to puppet management teams at the regionals who abuse their pilot workforce.

Couldn't disagree more. I think the opinions here represent an accurate cross section of pilots who actually vote on anything. Regarding the pilots who don't vote...they are irrelevant.

Carl

Carl Spackler

Sure we're willing to match SWA's productivity. I would argue we already do, but that's another discussion. The problem with what's already been TA'd by our negotiators is that there's no offsetting gain to the higher ALV's and reserve stuff. Specifically, there's no 6 plus hours per day minimum daily pay guarantee like...wait for it...wait for it...like SWA has.

Therefore, it is a very large concession that has already been TA'd. SWA productivity with no SWA minimum daily pay guarantee. Why didn't the Negotiator's Notepad mention this?

Carl

80ktsClamp

I tend to agree with you on our productivity. The training footprints for all the different fleets isn't our fault. Outside of all the multi-fleet training, I'd bet we are easily on par with WN productivity.

80 (4 aircraft schools in 5 and change years)

BigGuns

Hey Johnso looks like ALPA is changing the bi law with out a membership vote!!!
Delta Pilots Association - DPA News - ALPA Leaders Decide to Raise Dues on Members by October 2012

Carl Spackler

Most of this I already discussed in the post above, but I had to red highlight this. Even the most stalwart ALPA supporters admit our Section 1 is riddled with holes. Do you remember who wrote and agreed to that language? Now you're asking those same people to write you more "ironclad language?" ALPA attorneys cannot write ironclad language...even if they knew how..

Carl

80ktsClamp

You might want to check the details on the DPA sensationalism on this one. They are starting to remind me of what I hate most about ALPA.

buzzpat

I don't fly with many guys who are espousing full restoration. In fact, I cant think of more than one or two. I do fly with a majority of guys who want and expect an immediate and significant increase in pay, 401k contributions, work rule improvements, and scope reclamation. Anything short of a comprehensive offer along these lines, IMHO, will be voted down overwhelmingly.

johnso29

That's different. I was speaking of assessments. A dues raise does NOT require a vote. It also doesn't effect Delta pilots.

johnso29

And that's what I want too Buzz. It IMO, is more realistic then restoration.