Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-15-2012, 04:52 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
I think from the ALPA board. One former (long time ago) rep put it up. I think we're mostly re-feeding it to each other since. It's becoming more and more "truther" each time we pass it on.
Some pro-DPA guys seem to suggest they've had it confirmed from multiple sources. How many guys can there be on the MEC that feed them info?
For all I know, it could all come from a single source, and it could be wrong. I haven't been able to reach my reps yet. Meanwhile, I'm going to go with Scambo's version. Sleep better.
Some pro-DPA guys seem to suggest they've had it confirmed from multiple sources. How many guys can there be on the MEC that feed them info?
For all I know, it could all come from a single source, and it could be wrong. I haven't been able to reach my reps yet. Meanwhile, I'm going to go with Scambo's version. Sleep better.
05-15-2012, 04:56 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
5/10/5/5 will pass the over 55 crowd but for the younger bunch there will need to be more in order to pass.
05-15-2012, 04:58 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I prefer to look at Tomcats numbers and think we're ending DCI and codeshares with domestic 737-900ER operators.
05-15-2012, 05:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 7ERB
Posts: 2,039
Let me tell you what I heard. (Ill give you the other side of the spectrum)
29/9/9/5---> Another 5% for DC-->No more 50 seaters-->717s in house-->70 seaters limited but will transfer in house as soon as we create a DCI flow--> JV venture board with two union members to audit and oversee-->Alaska Merger (Alaska Pilots only 737 fence for 27 years)-->6 positive space first class tickets as a good faith jesture
**Dont let the low numbers that are being thrown around reduce your expectations thus satisfying a meager TA
TEN
29/9/9/5---> Another 5% for DC-->No more 50 seaters-->717s in house-->70 seaters limited but will transfer in house as soon as we create a DCI flow--> JV venture board with two union members to audit and oversee-->Alaska Merger (Alaska Pilots only 737 fence for 27 years)-->6 positive space first class tickets as a good faith jesture
**Dont let the low numbers that are being thrown around reduce your expectations thus satisfying a meager TA
TEN
05-15-2012, 05:07 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 67
No, apparently not a joke. I asked the same.
If this leak is correct, it stands as quite frankly a disrespectful offer.
I am beginning to think that the rushed timeline is part of the negotiating strategy and a ploy.
The sell now is going to be urgency.
Except this - NOW!
The offer is a one time only deal, reject it and the next will not be as good. Ratify it - NOW!
We need a hurried timeline for voting - NOW!
In the end, it might be apparent that there was no reason for the hurried hurried negotiation except to contrast the "except it now and capture the time/value or risk a drawn out section 6."
Kind of like a quick negotiating shock and awe to throw folks off balance.
If this leak is correct, it stands as quite frankly a disrespectful offer.
I am beginning to think that the rushed timeline is part of the negotiating strategy and a ploy.
The sell now is going to be urgency.
Except this - NOW!
The offer is a one time only deal, reject it and the next will not be as good. Ratify it - NOW!
We need a hurried timeline for voting - NOW!
In the end, it might be apparent that there was no reason for the hurried hurried negotiation except to contrast the "except it now and capture the time/value or risk a drawn out section 6."
Kind of like a quick negotiating shock and awe to throw folks off balance.
If these numbers are correct, then what I'm led to conclude is that the "opportunity" is a management only "opportunity," one designed to hype a lot of hope for contractual improvement, and then shatter the expectations. Big loser - DALPA. Then we all get further into the swamp of disunity (I know Bar, I know) trying to decide just who it is that will represent us. How many times have we said (at least on the boards), that if DALPA brings us a loser, then their going down.
In other words, DALPA has a lot to lose if this TA is not stellar. But, for the record, I have no idea what it actually looks like, and I too will hold my judgement until I can take a GOOD LONG look at it.
One other thought that may have been drawn out by george or someone. Since this is not Sec. 6 our NC is not negotiating with any potential negative consequences for the company (leverage). They could try to push back, but there's nothing under their feet. Whatever this looks like, it will look that way from the company's own positive goals they think they draw from having it settled.
Hoping these numbers are bogus, and the company is not playing us to divide...
05-15-2012, 05:14 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
Let me tell you what I heard. (Ill give you the other side of the spectrum)
29/9/9/5---> Another 5% for DC-->No more 50 seaters-->717s in house-->70 seaters limited but will transfer in house as soon as we create a DCI flow--> JV venture board with two union members to audit and oversee-->Alaska Merger (Alaska Pilots only 737 fence for 27 years)-->6 positive space first class tickets as a good faith jesture
**Dont let the low numbers that are being thrown around reduce your expectations thus satisfying a meager TA
TEN
29/9/9/5---> Another 5% for DC-->No more 50 seaters-->717s in house-->70 seaters limited but will transfer in house as soon as we create a DCI flow--> JV venture board with two union members to audit and oversee-->Alaska Merger (Alaska Pilots only 737 fence for 27 years)-->6 positive space first class tickets as a good faith jesture
**Dont let the low numbers that are being thrown around reduce your expectations thus satisfying a meager TA
TEN
05-15-2012, 05:25 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
One Taco,
Lets be realistic. What has our MEC got to negotiate with? Delta management could use scope adjustments to trade RJ's with Bombardier and avoid lease penalties on unwanted 50 seaters. That is worth, at most, a few hundred million dollars.
Management can not just throw money out benevolently. They have to be able to justify their actions to the owners of our airline, as represented by the Board. Management is not responding to a strike threat. They are only trading money for money, allowing us to cooperate and benefit from re-fleeting.
Another likely benefit of escaping the RJ200 leases is money to acquire some mainline jets (possibly 717's).
Now I'm not saying we can't force management's hand, but they will end up with less money and so will we.
The thing that makes this a bit of a "no brainer" is its timing. Traditional Section 6 would just be getting warmed up by the time this deal expires. Why not take home the additional $80 to $120K and still nail management five years from now?
Lets be realistic. What has our MEC got to negotiate with? Delta management could use scope adjustments to trade RJ's with Bombardier and avoid lease penalties on unwanted 50 seaters. That is worth, at most, a few hundred million dollars.
Management can not just throw money out benevolently. They have to be able to justify their actions to the owners of our airline, as represented by the Board. Management is not responding to a strike threat. They are only trading money for money, allowing us to cooperate and benefit from re-fleeting.
Another likely benefit of escaping the RJ200 leases is money to acquire some mainline jets (possibly 717's).
Now I'm not saying we can't force management's hand, but they will end up with less money and so will we.
The thing that makes this a bit of a "no brainer" is its timing. Traditional Section 6 would just be getting warmed up by the time this deal expires. Why not take home the additional $80 to $120K and still nail management five years from now?
05-15-2012, 05:38 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
One Taco,
Lets be realistic. What has our MEC got to negotiate with? Delta management could use scope adjustments to trade RJ's with Bombardier and avoid lease penalties on unwanted 50 seaters. That is worth, at most, a few hundred million dollars.
Management can not just throw money out benevolently. They have to be able to justify their actions to the owners of our airline, as represented by the Board. Management is not responding to a strike threat. They are only trading money for money, allowing us to cooperate and benefit from re-fleeting.
Another likely benefit of escaping the RJ200 leases is money to acquire some mainline jets (possibly 717's).
Now I'm not saying we can't force management's hand, but they will end up with less money and so will we.
The thing that makes this a bit of a "no brainer" is its timing. Traditional Section 6 would just be getting warmed up by the time this deal expires. Why not take home the additional $80 to $120K and still nail management five years from now?
Lets be realistic. What has our MEC got to negotiate with? Delta management could use scope adjustments to trade RJ's with Bombardier and avoid lease penalties on unwanted 50 seaters. That is worth, at most, a few hundred million dollars.
Management can not just throw money out benevolently. They have to be able to justify their actions to the owners of our airline, as represented by the Board. Management is not responding to a strike threat. They are only trading money for money, allowing us to cooperate and benefit from re-fleeting.
Another likely benefit of escaping the RJ200 leases is money to acquire some mainline jets (possibly 717's).
Now I'm not saying we can't force management's hand, but they will end up with less money and so will we.
The thing that makes this a bit of a "no brainer" is its timing. Traditional Section 6 would just be getting warmed up by the time this deal expires. Why not take home the additional $80 to $120K and still nail management five years from now?
05-15-2012, 05:45 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
Jack,
What force do we have to compel a different outcome?
I'm not recommending a vote. Just pointing out this is EXACTLY what I said was coming down. It is a cost neutral deal.
What force do we have to compel a different outcome?
I'm not recommending a vote. Just pointing out this is EXACTLY what I said was coming down. It is a cost neutral deal.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-15-2012 at 05:57 PM.
05-15-2012, 05:56 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
